# RIP-22 Support KV semantic storage

## Status
- Current Status: Draft
- Authors: [ltamber](https://github.com/ltamber)
- Shepherds: [duhengforever](mailto:[email protected])
- Mailing List discussion: <[email protected]>
- Pull Request: #PR_NUMBER
- Released: <released_version>
## Background & Motivation
### what do we need to do
- will we add a new module? **no**.
- will we add new APIs? **yes**.
- will we add new feature? **yes**.
### Why should we do that
- Are there any problems of our current project?
  Currently, we can't get/put key-value from/into rocketmq, so if we use
[connector](https://github.com/apache/rocketmq-externals), like FileSource,
BinlogSource, we can't persist current read position/dump position to
rocketmq rather than an external meta store like zookeeper/mysql, this will
bring more operator risk by introduce another component. this issue was
also in [streaming](https://github.com/apache/rocketmq-streams) scenarios
when developer want to persist meta info like checkpoint.
- What can we benefit proposed changes?
   rocketmq would not rely on external componet such as zookeeper/etcd to
support meta data storage.
### Goals
- What problem is this proposal designed to solve?
   Design a distribution persistent key-value store,  application can put
key-value into broker, and then get the value after a while, in the same
time, it can also have the ability like compareAndSet, prefix get and so on.
- To what degree should we solve the problem?
   This RIP must guarantee below point:
   1. High availablity: if one broker in the broker group is down,
application can put/get key-value through other broker, the availablity is
same with the message of rocketmq.
   2. High capacity: the amount of key-value may very large, so the
key-value can not store in memory,  we must store the key-value in disk
device.
### Non-Goals
- What problem is this proposal NOT designed to solve?
   Nothing specific.
- Are there any limits of this proposal?
   Nothing specific.
## Changes
### Architecture
![struct.png](
https://github.com/ltamber/UsefulTools/raw/master/image/struct.png)
We will introduce [rocksdb](https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb) to persist
key-value data, to say it more accurately, we use rocksdb to compact the
value with the same key, we will not enable WAL in rocksdb to decrease
write amplification (most case), instead we can recover the rocksdb state
and consistency by redo rocketmq commitlog. so the put/get flow showed on
the above figure is:
put: the key-value message will put into commitlog first, and then through
the `reputService` redo commitlog, the key-value will put to rocksdb
asynchronous, until this reput finished broker will not response to client.
get: application will get key-value from rocksdb thought broker directly.
In addition, if we don't want introduce [rocksdb](
https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb) and the meta data content will not
occupy too many memory, we can also use a key-value store base on memory
map, there will a periodic serialization and persistence thread to
guarantee data won't loss if broker restart or system abnormal shutdown,
and the memory state consistency will also guaranteed by redo rocketmq
commitlog.
### Interface Design/Change
- Method signature changes. **No**
- Method behavior changes. **No**
- CLI command changes. **No**
- Log format or content changes.
   the properties of the message will add two flag, `kv_opType` indicate
the request type is put key-value or get key-value, and `key` indicate the
request key both in put or get operation. In order to pass the key through
the network in the request header, we will encode/decode the key(byte array
format) use [base64](
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Base64.html)  encoding
method.
  ![serial](
https://github.com/ltamber/UsefulTools/raw/master/image/serial.png)
### Compatibility, Deprecation, and Migration Plan
- Are backward and forward compatibility taken into consideration?
   New RequestCode between client and broker are added, so there are 2
compatibility situations:
    1. old client+new broker: old clients won't make request with key-value
flag, so broker will not receive key-value request, which keep all things
as before.
    2. new client+old broker: new clients will send key-value request, but
the broker don't recognize the request code, and will return error msg. so
we should upgrade broker first to support this feature.
- Are there deprecated APIs?
   Nothing specific.
- How do we do migration?
   Nothing specific.
### Implementation Outline
We will implement the proposed changes by two phases.
#### Phase 1
1. Implement reput logic from commitlog to rocksdb.
2. Implement broker support key-value request and response.
3. Implement client support key-value request and response.
4. Implement key-value store use memory map.
5. Implement key-value store use rocksdb.
#### Phase 2
1. Implement prefix get semantics.
2. Implement compareAndSet semantics.
3. Implement rocksdb snapshot export/import.

Reply via email to