`balance_non_root` should be as close as possible to `balance_non_root`
in SQLite. This commits extract `balance_non_root` from `balance` and
renames `balance_leaf` to `balance` as it enables future work on a
complete `balance_non_root` procedure.
This PR's genesis is from investigating #532, but I still can't reliably
reproduce it on either `main` or this branch so I don't know if this PR
_fixes_ anything, but I guess it aligns us more with sqlite anyway
---
Anyway: I looked at DBs created with limbo and with sqlite using
[ImHex](https://github.com/WerWolv/ImHex) and the differences seem to
be:
1. SQLite uses varint according to [the
spec](https://www.sqlite.org/fileformat.html#record_format), whereas
limbo always encodes integers as i64
2. Limbo adds 4 bytes of zeros for overflow page pointer (even in cases
where the cell doesnt overflow)
3. Limbo adds a space after `CREATE TABLE name` before the `(` even when
user doesn't specify it?
I implemented the following:
- Fix 1: Varint serialization of i8, i16, i24, i32, i48 and i64
according to payload, instead of always using i64
- Fix 2: Removed the 4 bytes reserved for overflow page pointer in non-
overflow cases
Reviewed-by: Pere Diaz Bou <pere-altea@homail.com>
Closes#550
This includes an inner struct in Page wrapped with Unsafe cell to access
it. This is done intentionally because concurrency control of pages is
handled by pages and not by the page itself.
- Changed `Cursor` trait to be able to get access to `root_page`
- SQLite only updates last_insert_rowid for non-schema inserts. So we check if the `InsertAwait` is not for `root_page` before
updating rowid
Hi all,
I attempted to implement the `order by desc`, which mainly consists of
the following two parts:
1. for cases where the primary key can be utilized, I implemented
`push_scan_direction` to push the scan direction down to the `Scan`.
2. for cases where the primary key cannot be utilized, I re-implemented
the sorting in `Sorter::rewind` based on whether it's desc or asc.
there is also some related work to be done, such as sort using secondary
index, I will attempt to do next.
Please help review this and let me know how I can improve it, thanks in
advance
Reviewed-by: Pere Diaz Bou <pere-altea@hotmail.com>
Closes#376
