Skip to content

Integrate tiered storage - #6305

Draft
kim wants to merge 38 commits into
masterfrom
kim/tiered-storage-integration
Draft

kim wants to merge 38 commits into
masterfrom
kim/tiered-storage-integration

Conversation

@kim

@kim kim commented Oct 15, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description of Changes

Integrates tiered storage into the rest of the codebase.

This is a big change, because every call site that may access a page or blob
becomes fallible due to the possibility of fault errors.

Much of this is mechanical, but note that transaction commit becomes a two-step
process with this patch: first, all pages and blobs affected by the transaction
are faulted in if necessary, and pinned so they can't be evicted until the
transaction completes. Then, the transaction is actually applied -- this remains
infallible and therefore atomic.

API and ABI breaking changes

Internal only.

Rollback safety impact

Currently rollback safe.

Expected complexity level and risk

5

Testing

@kim
kim added this pull request to stack #6306 October 15, 2026 14:44
joshua-spacetime added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 16, 2026
Remove nine newly added Deep storage tests (429 lines) at the user's request to reduce the review diff. This removes new coverage for resident/tiered storage, prepared inserts, page reuse, and blob pins. Existing tests from #6305 and all production code remain unchanged.

Validation: 112 existing spacetimedb-table library tests pass; clippy for the library and tests passes with -D warnings.
joshua-spacetime added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 16, 2026
Remove the local macOS benchmarking accommodations from the review diff. Restore the original unconditional Table=328 assertion and keep TxState=144, which accounts for the inline transaction blob map. Non-macOS compiled code is unchanged.

Native macOS builds again fail the original size checks, as on #6305; a compatibility patch is saved outside the branch for future local profiling.

Validation: rustfmt and git diff --check; exact diff is six deleted lines. Native clippy confirms the expected Table size assertion failure (328 versus 336). Linux checks were not rerun locally.
@kim
kim force-pushed the kim/tiered-storage-integration branch from 7625b27 to b840802 Compare October 19, 2026 06:31
Comment thread crates/table/src/bflatn_to.rs Outdated
Comment on lines +161 to +167
serialized.write_large_blobs(blob_store)
serialized.write_large_blobs(blobs)?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We may need to rollback previous changes to the page now that this is fallible, no?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ya possibly. I think it is actually infallible because we pinned all the blobs, but that is not expressible locally at the moment.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Comment on lines +727 to +729
// All page mutations have finished, so pinned blob frames no longer
// need to be pinned by the commit guard.
drop(prepared.pinned_blobs);

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This releases the blob pins, but where do we decrement the ref count and eventually drop/remove the blob(s)?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The refcounts are in the BlobSet that is owned by the transaction state, while the blob frames are shared via the ResidentObjects. The normal insertion path then updates the refcount in the committed state's BlobSet.

Just dropping the handles will leave dangling weak references in ResidentObjects, unless successful insertion created new strong references in the committed state BlobSet (they are guaranteed to become resident, because we pinned them).

Comment thread crates/table/src/table.rs Outdated
Comment on lines +1597 to +1851
ptrs.extend(self.scan_rows(&NullBlobStore).map(|row| row.pointer()));
ptrs
for row in self.scan_rows(&BlobSet::new_for_test()) {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this equivalent to NullBlobStore?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No it's not, the NullBlobStore panics on any method invocation. I'll have to find a way to emulate this, as BlobSet is not a trait object.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Comment thread crates/table/src/table.rs Outdated

// If we removed the last unique index, add a pointer map.
if index.is_unique() && !self.indexes.values().any(|idx| idx.is_unique()) {
self.pointer_map = Some(pointer_map.unwrap_or_else(|| self.rebuild_pointer_map(blob_store)));
self.pointer_map = Some(pointer_map.map_or_else(|| self.rebuild_pointer_map(blobs), Ok)?);

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When do we record a pending schema change for a deleted index? Before or after this call? If after, we'll rollback to an invalid state if the pointer map rebuild fails.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Normally before. I added rollback_add_index specifically to not rebuild the pointer map on rollback -- we should end up in the same state that we started with as pending schema changes get reverted in reverse order (and rebuilding on intermediate reverts was probably a bug to begin with). The TODO is to remind me that this needs a test.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Comment thread crates/table/src/table.rs Outdated
@@ -1377,33 +1610,34 @@ impl Table {
// SAFETY:
// - `self` trivially has the same `row_layout` as `self`.
// - We just inserted `temp_ptr`, so it's valid.
let (_, existing_row_ptr) = unsafe { Self::find_same_row(self, self, blob_store, temp_ptr, None) };
let (_, existing_row_ptr) = unsafe { Self::find_same_row(self, self, blobs, temp_ptr, None) }?;

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The temporary insert above needs to be rolled back in the case of a failure here as well as the other fallible calls below.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't see at moment how this method could be made atomic, because deleting the temporary row can itself fail. But what should happen then?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@joshua-spacetime joshua-spacetime left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

More rollback safety concerns. It would be good to add some rollback tests if they're indeed legitimate.

Comment on lines +804 to +823
let effects = UpdateEffects::after_migration(res, &tx);
let effects = UpdateEffects::after_migration(res, &tx)?;

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Rollback safety: If this fails, do we undo the migration?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Comment on lines 2685 to 2689

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Rollback safety: The revert is skipped if get_row_ref fails.

Comment on lines +2731 to +2732
commit_table.make_index_non_unique(index_id, commit_blob_store)?;
tx_table.make_index_non_unique(index_id, tx_blob_store)?;

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Rollback safety: make_index_non_unique succeeds for commit_table but fails on tx_table. Is this a problem? It would appear so, since we haven't added the pending schema change at this point.

@kim
kim force-pushed the kim/tiered-storage-base branch from e1cd71a to 63d327f Compare October 22, 2026 16:05
@kim
kim force-pushed the kim/tiered-storage-integration branch from 8c3a919 to 4a229fb Compare October 22, 2026 16:10
@kim
kim removed this pull request from stack #6306 October 22, 2026 16:12
@kim
kim added this pull request to stack #6360 October 22, 2026 16:21
@kim
kim force-pushed the kim/tiered-storage-integration branch 5 times, most recently from f9e3421 to 89a9a07 Compare October 23, 2026 22:51
@kim
kim force-pushed the kim/tiered-storage-base branch from 63d327f to 490b308 Compare October 23, 2026 23:04
@kim
kim force-pushed the kim/tiered-storage-integration branch from 89a9a07 to 002db2f Compare October 23, 2026 23:06
@kim
kim force-pushed the kim/tiered-storage-base branch from 490b308 to 397e694 Compare October 23, 2026 23:06
joshua-spacetime added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 29, 2026
Remove nine newly added Deep storage tests (429 lines) at the user's request to reduce the review diff. This removes new coverage for resident/tiered storage, prepared inserts, page reuse, and blob pins. Existing tests from #6305 and all production code remain unchanged.

Validation: 112 existing spacetimedb-table library tests pass; clippy for the library and tests passes with -D warnings.
joshua-spacetime added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 29, 2026
Remove the local macOS benchmarking accommodations from the review diff. Restore the original unconditional Table=328 assertion and keep TxState=144, which accounts for the inline transaction blob map. Non-macOS compiled code is unchanged.

Native macOS builds again fail the original size checks, as on #6305; a compatibility patch is saved outside the branch for future local profiling.

Validation: rustfmt and git diff --check; exact diff is six deleted lines. Native clippy confirms the expected Table size assertion failure (328 versus 336). Linux checks were not rerun locally.
@joshua-spacetime
joshua-spacetime force-pushed the kim/tiered-storage-integration branch 2 times, most recently from 1e739db to bb400af Compare October 30, 2026 20:00
kim and others added 5 commits October 30, 2026 17:14
Introduces the datastructures for tiered storage / faultable objects.
Integrates tiered storage, replacing `Pages` with `PageSet` and
`BlobStore` with `BlobSet`. Handles fallible object acquisition
everywhere.

Also implements two-phase transaction commit, which preflights the
transaction and pins all affected objects. This allows the actual merge
into the committed state to be infallible and therefore atomic.
Keep directly owned pages and borrowed access for resident tables while
retaining tiered page eviction and the newer RowRef API. Stream eligible
resident commits while their transaction state is alive, reuse resident
pages and budget permits, and reduce row/blob bookkeeping overhead.

Also fix shared blob registration and preserve logical blob entries on
eviction, with coverage for both backends, budgets, snapshots and pins.

Validation: 239 storage tests pass; Clippy passes with -D warnings.
Three alternating 60-second TypeScript keynote runs with pipelining and
confirmed reads enabled averaged 231,612 transfers/sec versus 241,902
on master (4.25% lower; paired gaps 3.26%, 3.49%, and 5.99%).
kim added 23 commits October 30, 2026 17:14
assert that an existing frame is actually the same allocation.
Commit changes only after potential pointer map rebuild succeeded.
If the pointer map needs to be rebuilt, rebuild it first before
committing the changes.
This prevents unnecessarily faulting in blobs.

With tiered storage, constructing a RowRef requires to load a
BlobReadSet, so calling `scan_rows` with an empty BlobSet is not
equivalent to the previous `NullBlobStore`.
Fallibly collect blob references before mutating anything.
Delete rows by marking all pages as absent.
`MutTxId::delete_by_row_value`, too
To make this possible, introduce a `PinnedRow` that works like an owned
`RowRef`. When a pinned row is in scope, potentially faulting functions
can be unwrapped, as they are guaranteed to not fault the pinned row's
page.
@joshua-spacetime
joshua-spacetime force-pushed the kim/tiered-storage-integration branch from bb400af to 8eb4f30 Compare October 31, 2026 00:14
# Description of Changes

Tiered storage makes loading rows fallible. Some cleanup,
result-construction, and duplicate-lookup paths looked up rows again
even though they already held the required page and blob pins.

This PR reuses those existing pins, making the distinction between
acquiring a row and using an already-loaded row clearer:

- **Cleanup:** Expose the existing `Table::delete_unchecked` helper to
the datastore and use it to delete rows whose pins are already held. Its
deletion implementation is unchanged.
- **Update results:** Retain the replacement row’s pins through
confirmation and construct the returned `RowRef` from them, avoiding
another lookup after mutation.
- **Duplicate lookup:** Pass a borrowed `RowRef` constructed from
existing pins into lookup and comparison helpers to avoid redundant row
acquisition.

# API and ABI breaking changes

N/A

# Rollback safety impact

N/A

# Expected complexity level and risk

3

# Testing

Relies on existing coverage
# Description of Changes

Tiered storage makes loading rows fallible. When mutation code already
holds a `PinnedRow`, it can reuse the row’s page and blob pins instead
of performing another storage lookup during cleanup.

This PR uses those existing pins more consistently, keeping cleanup free
of additional storage reads and making unsafe mutation error behavior
easier to reason about:
- Route insert/update comparison failures through existing cleanup,
using the attempted row’s retained pins.
- Restore the old row’s index entries without repeating duplicate-row
comparisons.
- During insertion, load the committed row being returned before
removing its transaction-local deletion marker.

The PR also extends commit preparation to pin pages needed for
pointer-map hash-collision comparisons. This protects committed-state,
since those comparisons must not encounter a storage failure after
committed rows have already been changed.

# API and ABI breaking changes

N/A

# Rollback safety impact

N/A

# Expected complexity level and risk

3

# Testing

Existing coverage
## Description of Changes

Fix two cases where rolling back a transaction could leave committed
tables with different duplicate-detection or uniqueness behavior:

- **Preserve the pointer map when undoing a non-unique index addition.**
Adding that index leaves the existing pointer map untouched, but
rollback previously replaced it with `None`. Subsequent duplicate checks
could panic. Restore the saved map only when undoing a unique index
addition.
- **Preserve indexes that were already unique before adding a
constraint.** Rollback previously made every matching index non-unique,
including indexes enforcing an existing constraint. Convert and record
only previously non-unique indexes, so undo reverses only changes made
by this operation.

Both fixes use the existing undo records.

## API and ABI breaking changes

N/A

## Rollback safety impact

N/A

## Expected complexity level and risk

2

## Testing

- Verify that rolling back unique and non-unique index additions
restores the pointer map and preserves duplicate detection.
- Verify that rolling back an additional unique constraint preserves the
original constraint, its index uniqueness, and rejection of conflicting
inserts.
@kim
kim removed this pull request from stack #6360 November 3, 2026 07:03
@kim
kim changed the base branch from kim/tiered-storage-base to master November 3, 2026 16:33

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants