More proof the tests are working.
This bug was in the code that does an extra lookup for the was-split entry
during merge, so we make sure we have the right id to attach the split
name to. Humorously, this code was already set up correctly, the
"split_id" just wasn't actually used. Unfortunately since
lfsr_rbyd_lookup uses out-pointers to return multiple things the
compiler couldn't detect the unused variable.
B-trees with names are now working, though this required a number of
changes to the B-tree layout:
1. B-tree no-longer require name entries (LFSR_TAG_MK) on each branch.
This is a nice optimization to the design, since these name entries
just waste space in purely weight-based B-trees, which are probably
going to be most B-trees in the filesystem.
If a name entry is missing, the struct entry, which is required,
should have the effective weight of the entry.
The first entry in every rbyd block is expected to be have no name
entry, since this is the default path for B-tree lookups.
2. The first entry in every rbyd block _may_ have a name entry, which
is ignored. I'm calling these "vestigial names" to make them sound
cooler than they actually are.
These vestigial names show up in a couple complicated B-tree
operations:
- During B-tree split, since pending attributes are calculated before
the split, we need to play out pending attributes into the rbyd
before deciding what name becomes the name of entry in the parent.
This creates a vestigial name which we _could_ immediately remove,
but the remove adds additional size to the must-fit split operation
- During B-tree pop/merge, if we remove the leading no-name entry,
the second, named entry becomes the leading entry. This creates a
vestigial name that _looks_ easy enough to remove when making the
pending attributes for pop/merge, but turns out the be surprisingly
tricky if the parent undergoes a split/merge at the same time.
It may be possible to remove all these vestigial names proactively,
but this adds additional rbyd lookups to figure out the exact tag to
remove, complicates things in a fragile way, and doesn't actually
reduce storage costs until the rbyd is compacted.
The main downside is that these B-trees may be a bit more confusing
to debug.
Name lookup brings back the O(m') scan-during-fetch approach of the
previous metadata layout. Since our rbyd trees map id+attr pairs and not
actual names, this beats the alternative O(m log(m)) scan of the tree.
Though tree searching does only include the current attributes, where as
scanning during fetch needs to also look at outdated attributes. Which
may make the winner less obvious depending on how we find the rbyd. But
being able to do the search in the same pass as fetch is an extra plus.
---
What turned out to be surprisingly complicated was the propagation of
names during B-tree splits and merges. The on-disk reference,
lfsr_data_t, does most of the heavy lifting here, but there's just a lot
of corner cases to consider.
At the moment this isn't working due to outdated names on the leading
entries of the rbyds, but to fix this bigger changes to the B-tree
layout may be needed.
TEST_PERMUTATION/BENCH_PERMUTATION make it possible to map an integer to
a specific permutation efficiently. This is helpful since our testing
framework really only parameterizes single integers.
The exact implementation took a bit of trial and error. It's based on
https://stackoverflow.com/a/7919887 and
https://stackoverflow.com/a/24257996, but modified to run in O(n) with
no extra memory. In the discussion it seemed like this may not actually
be possible for lexicographic ordering of permutations, but fortunately
we don't care about the specific ordering, only the reproducibility.
Here's how it works:
1. First populate an array with all numbers 0-n.
2. Iterate through each index, selecting only from the remaining
numbers based on our current permutation.
.- i%rem --.
v .----+----.
[p0 p1 |-> r0 r1 r2 r3]
Normally to maintain lexicographic ordering you should have to do a O(n)
shift at this step as you remove each number. But instead we can just swap
the removed number and number under the index. This effectively
shrinks the remaining part of the array, but permutes the numbers
a bit. Fortunately, since each successive permutation swaps
at the same location, the resulting permutations will be both
exhaustive and reproducible, if unintuitive.
Now permutation/fuzz tests can reproduce specific failures by defining
either -DPERMUTATION=x or -DSEED=x.
I wondered if walking in Python 2's footsteps was going to run into the
same issues and sure enough, memory backed iterators became unweildy.
The motivation for this change is that large ranges in tests, such as
iterators over seeds or permutations, became prohibitively expensive to
compile. This meant more iteration moving into tests with more steps to
reproduce failures. This sort of defeats the purpuse of the test
framework.
The solution here is to move test permutation generation out of test.py
and into the test runner itself. The allows defines to generate their
values programmatically.
This does conflict with the test frameworks support of sets of explicit
permutations, but this is fixed by also moving these "permutation sets"
down into the test runner.
I guess it turns out the closer your representation matches your
implementation the better everythign works.
Additionally the define caching layer got a bit of tweaking. We can't
precalculate the defines because of mutual recursion, but we can
precalculate which define/permutation each define id maps to. This is
necessary as otherwise figuring out each define's define-specific
permutation would be prohibitively expensive.
Another straightforward exercise of making sure the pending attributes
are setup correctly.
If you think this isn't worth its own function, consider how much
overhead the 3x commits for pop+push+push would add, especially for
large-prog devices.
Worst case this can be dropped in the future.
A single child is just another condition to watch out for during B-tree
merge, since a single-child obviously can't have a sibling.
This is a good safety to have, but I was surprised this can happen. But
it turns out to be quite easy since our rbyds defer the B-tree
operations until compaction. A merge down to a single child won't
propagate the merge until the parent compacts.
B-tree remove/merge is the most annoying part of B-trees.
The implementation here follows the same ideas implemented in push/split:
1. Defer splits/merges until compaction.
2. Assume our split/merge will succeed and play it out into the rbyd.
3. On the first sign of failure, revert any unnecessary changes by
appending deletes.
4. Do all of this in a single commit to avoid issues with single-prog
blocks.
Mapping this onto B-tree merge, the condition that triggers merge is
when our rbyd is <1/4 the block_size after compaction, and the condition
that aborts a merge is when our rbyd is >1/2 the block_size, since that
would trigger a split on a later compact.
Weaving this into lfsr_btree_commit is a bit subtle, but relatively
straightforward all things considered.
One downside is it's not physically possible to try merging with both
siblings, so we have to choose just one to attempt a merge. We handle
the corner case of merging the last sibling in a block explicitly, and
in theory the other sibling will eventually trigger a merge during its
own compaction.
Extra annoying are the corner cases with merges in the root rbyd that
make the root rbyd degenerate. We really should avoid a compaction in
this case, as otherwise we would erase a block that we immediately
inline at a significant cost. However determining if our root rbyd is
degenerate is tricky. We can determine a degenerate root with children
by checking if our rbyd's weight matches the B-tree's weight when we
merge. But determining a degenerate root that is a leaf requires
manually looking up both children in lfsr_btree_pop to see if they will
result in a degenerate root. Ugh.
On the bright side, this does all seem to be working now. Which
completes the last of the core B-tree algorithms.
This was a rather simple exercise. lfsr_btree_commit does most of the
work already, so all this needed was setting up the pending attributes
correctly.
Also:
- Tweaked dbgrbyd.py's tree rendering to match dbgbtree.py's.
- Added a print to each B-tree test to help find the resulting B-tree
when debugging.
- After a B-tree split, when we're append pending attributes, it's
possible for the id chosen for bisection to be itself modified by
pending grows/shrinks. This needs to be accounted for in the two
passes for the two children.
But this means our tests are working.
This really just required care around calculating the expected B-tree id
and rbyd id (which are different!).
B-tree append, aka B-tree push with id=weight, is actually the outlier.
We need a B-tree id that can identify the rbyd we're appending to, but
this id itself doesn't exist in the tree yet, which can be a bit tricky.
This involves many, many hacks, but is enough to test the concept
and start looking at how it interacts with different block sizes.
Note only append (lfsr_btree_push on the end) is implemented, and it
makes some assumption about how the ids can interact when splitting
rbyds.
Christopher Haster