[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-17076?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ivan Bessonov updated IGNITE-17076:
-----------------------------------
Labels: ignite-3 (was: )
> Unify RowId format for different storages
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: IGNITE-17076
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-17076
> Project: Ignite
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Ivan Bessonov
> Priority: Major
> Labels: ignite-3
>
> Current MV store bridge API has a fatal flaw, born from a misunderstanding.
> There's a method called "insert" that generates RowId by itself. This is
> wrong, because it can lead to different id for the same row on the replica
> storage. This completely breaks everything.
> Every replicated write command, that inserts new value, should produce same
> row ids. There are several ways to achieve this:
> * Use timestamps as identifiers. This is not very convenient, because we
> would have to attach partition id on top of it. It's mandatory to know the
> partition of the row.
> * Use more complicated structure, for example a tuple of (raftCommitIndex,
> partitionId, batchCounter), where
> ** raftCommitIndex is the index of write command that performs insertion.
> ** partitionId is an integer identifier of the partition. Could be 4 bytes,
> considering that there are plans to support more than 65000 partitions per
> table.
> ** batchCounter is used to differentiate insertions made in a single write
> command. We can limit it with 2 bytes to save a little bit of space, if it's
> necessary.
> I prefer the second option, but maybe it could be revised during the
> implementation.
> Of course, method "insert" should be removed from bridge API. Tests have to
> be updated. With the lack of RAFT group in storage tests, we can generate row
> ids artificially, it's not a big deal.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)
