feat(anna): Added a two-level data model for the layer zero key-value store. #1246
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
… store.
The data model supported by the KV store is analogous to the following JSON:
```json
{
"sys": [
"members": [
"key": "value"
]
],
"usr": [
"table_a": [
...
],
"table_b": [
...
],
]
}
```
A single `TableMap` can be used to model `sys` or `usr`. We're only planning for these two namespaces for now, so there is no higher-level lattices to allow for more namespaces.
Initially, I started with support for deleting an entire table efficiently: but I have decided to drop that until the need arises. If it isn't needed in practice, the lack of a sharp operation that can delete an entire table leads to a safer system. It also simplified the code a fair bit.
The tests may feel like they're testing lattice merging (and therefore redundant), but I wrote these to convince myself that type signatures of the data model are working. I may remove them in the future (or not!).
Deploying hydroflow with
|
| Latest commit: |
40f187b
|
| Status: | ⚡️ Build in progress... |
rohitkulshreshtha
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 5, 2024
… store. (#1246) The data model supported by the layer 0 key-value store is analogous to the following JSON: ```json { "sys": [ "members": [ "key": "value" ] ], "usr": [ "table_a": [ ... ], "table_b": [ ... ], ] } ``` A single `TableMap` can model `sys` or `usr`. We're only planning for these two namespaces for now, so no higher-level lattices allow for more namespaces. Initially, I started with support for deleting an entire table efficiently, but I have decided to drop that until needed. If it isn't needed in practice, the lack of a sharp operation that can delete an entire table leads to a safer system. It also simplified the code a fair bit. The tests may feel like they're testing lattice merging (and therefore redundant), but I wrote these to convince myself that the type signatures of the data model are working. I may remove them in the future (or not!).
rohitkulshreshtha
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 7, 2024
… store. (#1246) The data model supported by the layer 0 key-value store is analogous to the following JSON: ```json { "sys": [ "members": [ "key": "value" ] ], "usr": [ "table_a": [ ... ], "table_b": [ ... ], ] } ``` A single `TableMap` can model `sys` or `usr`. We're only planning for these two namespaces for now, so no higher-level lattices allow for more namespaces. Initially, I started with support for deleting an entire table efficiently, but I have decided to drop that until needed. If it isn't needed in practice, the lack of a sharp operation that can delete an entire table leads to a safer system. It also simplified the code a fair bit. The tests may feel like they're testing lattice merging (and therefore redundant), but I wrote these to convince myself that the type signatures of the data model are working. I may remove them in the future (or not!).
rohitkulshreshtha
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 20, 2024
… store. (#1246) The data model supported by the layer 0 key-value store is analogous to the following JSON: ```json { "sys": [ "members": [ "key": "value" ] ], "usr": [ "table_a": [ ... ], "table_b": [ ... ], ] } ``` A single `TableMap` can model `sys` or `usr`. We're only planning for these two namespaces for now, so no higher-level lattices allow for more namespaces. Initially, I started with support for deleting an entire table efficiently, but I have decided to drop that until needed. If it isn't needed in practice, the lack of a sharp operation that can delete an entire table leads to a safer system. It also simplified the code a fair bit. The tests may feel like they're testing lattice merging (and therefore redundant), but I wrote these to convince myself that the type signatures of the data model are working. I may remove them in the future (or not!).
rohitkulshreshtha
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 20, 2024
… store. (#1246) The data model supported by the layer 0 key-value store is analogous to the following JSON: ```json { "sys": [ "members": [ "key": "value" ] ], "usr": [ "table_a": [ ... ], "table_b": [ ... ], ] } ``` A single `TableMap` can model `sys` or `usr`. We're only planning for these two namespaces for now, so no higher-level lattices allow for more namespaces. Initially, I started with support for deleting an entire table efficiently, but I have decided to drop that until needed. If it isn't needed in practice, the lack of a sharp operation that can delete an entire table leads to a safer system. It also simplified the code a fair bit. The tests may feel like they're testing lattice merging (and therefore redundant), but I wrote these to convince myself that the type signatures of the data model are working. I may remove them in the future (or not!).
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The data model supported by the layer 0 key-value store is analogous to the following JSON:
{ "sys": [ "members": [ "key": "value" ] ], "usr": [ "table_a": [ ... ], "table_b": [ ... ], ] }A single
TableMapcan modelsysorusr. We're only planning for these two namespaces for now, so no higher-level lattices allow for more namespaces.Initially, I started with support for deleting an entire table efficiently, but I have decided to drop that until needed. If it isn't needed in practice, the lack of a sharp operation that can delete an entire table leads to a safer system. It also simplified the code a fair bit.
The tests may feel like they're testing lattice merging (and therefore redundant), but I wrote these to convince myself that the type signatures of the data model are working. I may remove them in the future (or not!).