Commit Graph

41 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Preston Thorpe
b09dcceeef Merge 'Fixes views' from Glauber Costa
This is a collection of fixes for materialized views ahead of adding
support for JOINs.
It is mostly issues with how we assume there is a single table, with a
single delta, but we have to send more than one.
Those are things that are just objectively wrong, so I am sending it
separately to make the JOIN PR smaller.

Reviewed-by: Preston Thorpe <preston@turso.tech>

Closes #3009
2025-09-12 07:43:32 -04:00
Glauber Costa
874047276e views: pass a DeltaSet for merge_delta
A DeltaSet is a collection of Deltas, one per table.
We'll need that for joins. The populate step for now will still generate
a single set. That will be our next step to fix.
2025-09-11 05:30:46 -07:00
Glauber Costa
841de334b7 view: catch all tables mentioned, instead of just one.
Ahead of the implementation of JOINs, we need to evolve the
IncrementalView, which currently only accepts a single base table,
to keep a list of tables mentioned in the statement.
2025-09-11 05:30:46 -07:00
Glauber Costa
c15ac87a3c fix cursor validation
We are validating that the weights on the materialized view table are
-1, 0, and 1. This is only true for the aggregator operator. For DBSP
in general, any number will do.

Our algorithm, however, would have deleted anything from the BTree that
is <= 0. So we don't expect them here.
2025-09-11 05:30:46 -07:00
Glauber Costa
e6008e532a Add a second delta to the EvalState, Commit
We will assert that the second one is always empty for the existing
operators - as they should be!

But joins will need both.
2025-09-11 05:30:46 -07:00
Glauber Costa
6541a43670 move hashable_row to dbsp.rs
There will be a new type for joins, so it makes less sense to have
a separate file just for it. dbsp.rs is good.
2025-09-11 05:30:46 -07:00
Glauber Costa
1fd345f382 unify code used for persistence.
We have code written for BTree (ZSet) persistence in both compiler.rs
and operator.rs, because there are minor differences between them. With
joins coming, it is time to unify this code.
2025-09-11 05:30:46 -07:00
Jussi Saurio
e3bd00883b Fix creation of automatic indexes
indexes with the naming scheme "sqlite_autoindex_<tblname>_<number>"
are automatically created when a table is created with UNIQUE or
PRIMARY KEY definitions.

these indexes must map to the table definition SQL in definition order,
i.e. sqlite_autoindex_foo_1 must be the first instance of UNIQUE or
PRIMARY KEY and so on.

this commit fixes our autoindex creation / parsing so that this invariant
is upheld.
2025-09-11 14:11:30 +03:00
Pekka Enberg
832e0dee81 core/incremental: Fix typos in cursor.rs
Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
2025-09-05 15:40:45 +03:00
Glauber Costa
08b2e685d5 Persistence for DBSP-based materialized views
This fairly long commit implements persistence for materialized view.
It is hard to split because of all the interdependencies between components,
so it is a one big thing. This commit message will at least try to go into
details about the basic architecture.

Materialized Views as tables
============================

Materialized views are now a normal table - whereas before they were a virtual
table.  By making a materialized view a table, we can reuse all the
infrastructure for dealing with tables (cursors, etc).

One of the advantages of doing this is that we can create indexes on view
columns.  Later, we should also be able to write those views to separate files
with ATTACH write.

Materialized Views as Zsets
===========================

The contents of the table are a ZSet: rowid, values, weight. Readers will
notice that because of this, the usage of the ZSet data structure dwindles
throughout the codebase. The main difference between our materialized ZSet and
the standard DBSP ZSet, is that obviously ours is backed by a BTree, not a Hash
(since SQLite tables are BTrees)

Aggregator State
================

In DBSP, the aggregator nodes also have state. To store that state, there is a
second table.  The table holds all aggregators in the view, and there is one
table per view. That is __turso_internal_dbsp_state_{view_name}. The format of
that table is similar to a ZSet: rowid, serialized_values, weight. We serialize
the values because there will be many aggregators in the table. We can't rely
on a particular format for the values.

The Materialized View Cursor
============================

Reading from a Materialized View essentially means reading from the persisted
ZSet, and enhancing that with data that exists within the transaction.
Transaction data is ephemeral, so we do not materialize this anywhere: we have
a carefully crafted implementation of seek that takes care of merging weights
and stitching the two sets together.
2025-09-05 07:04:33 -05:00
Pekka Enberg
1de647758f Merge 'refactor parser fmt' from Lâm Hoàng Phúc
@penberg this PR try to clean up `turso_parser`'s`fmt` code.
- `get_table_name` and `get_column_name` should return None when
table/column does not exist.
```rust
/// Context to be used in ToSqlString
pub trait ToSqlContext {
    /// Given an id, get the table name
    /// First Option indicates whether the table exists
    ///
    /// Currently not considering aliases
    fn get_table_name(&self, _id: TableInternalId) -> Option<&str> {
        None
    }

    /// Given a table id and a column index, get the column name
    /// First Option indicates whether the column exists
    /// Second Option indicates whether the column has a name
    fn get_column_name(&self, _table_id: TableInternalId, _col_idx: usize) -> Option<Option<&str>> {
        None
    }

    // help function to handle missing table/column names
    fn get_table_and_column_names(
        &self,
        table_id: TableInternalId,
        col_idx: usize,
    ) -> (String, String) {
        let table_name = self
            .get_table_name(table_id)
            .map(|s| s.to_owned())
            .unwrap_or_else(|| format!("t{}", table_id.0));

        let column_name = self
            .get_column_name(table_id, col_idx)
            .map(|opt| {
                opt.map(|s| s.to_owned())
                    .unwrap_or_else(|| format!("c{col_idx}"))
            })
            .unwrap_or_else(|| format!("c{col_idx}"));

        (table_name, column_name)
    }
}
```
- remove `FmtTokenStream` because it is same as `WriteTokenStream `
- remove useless functions and simplify `ToTokens`
```rust
/// Generate token(s) from AST node
/// Also implements Display to make sure devs won't forget Display
pub trait ToTokens: Display {
    /// Send token(s) to the specified stream with context
    fn to_tokens<S: TokenStream + ?Sized, C: ToSqlContext>(
        &self,
        s: &mut S,
        context: &C,
    ) -> Result<(), S::Error>;

    // Return displayer representation with context
    fn displayer<'a, 'b, C: ToSqlContext>(&'b self, ctx: &'a C) -> SqlDisplayer<'a, 'b, C, Self>
    where
        Self: Sized,
    {
        SqlDisplayer::new(ctx, self)
    }
}
```

Closes #2748
2025-09-02 18:35:43 +03:00
TcMits
33a04fbaf7 resolve conflict 2025-09-02 17:30:10 +07:00
TcMits
37f33dc45f add eq/contains/starts_with/ends_with_ignore_ascii_case 2025-08-31 16:18:42 +07:00
Glauber Costa
565c2a698a adjust views to use circuits 2025-08-27 14:21:32 -05:00
Glauber Costa
29b93e3e58 add DBSP circuit compiler
The next step is to adapt the view code to use circuits instead of
listing the operators manually.
2025-08-27 14:21:32 -05:00
Glauber Costa
898c0260f3 move operator to eval / commit pattern
We need a read only phase and a commit phase. Otherwise we will never
be able to rollback changes properly. We currently do that, but we
do that in the view. Before we move to circuits, this needs to be
internalized by the operator.
2025-08-27 14:21:32 -05:00
Glauber Costa
7e4bacca55 remove join operator
I am 100% sure they are total bullshit by now, since we don't implement
the join operator yet. The code evolved a lot, and in every turn there
are issues with aggregators, projectors, filters... some subtle, some
not so subtle.

We keep having to patch join slightly as we make changes to the API, but
we don't truly exercise whether or not they keep working because there
is no support for them in the views. Therefore: let's remove it. We'll
bring it back later.
2025-08-27 11:18:54 -05:00
Glauber Costa
05b275f865 remove min/max and add more tests for other aggregations
min/max require O(N) storage because of deletions. It is easy to see
why: if you *add* a new row, you can quickly and incrementally check
if it is smaller / larger than the previous accumulator.

But when you *delete* a row you can't do that and have to check the
previous values.

Feldera uses something called "traces" which to me look a lot like
indexes. When we implement materialization, this is easy to do. But to
avoid having something broken, we'll just disable min / max until then.
2025-08-27 11:18:54 -05:00
Glauber Costa
6e2bd364ee fix issue with rowids and deletions
The operator itself should handle deletions and updates that change
the rowid by consolidating its state.

Our current materialized views track state themselves, so we don't
see this problem now. But it becomes apparent once we switch the
views to use circuits.
2025-08-27 11:18:54 -05:00
Glauber Costa
dbe29e4bab fix aggregator operator
It needs to keep track of the old values to emit retractions (when the
aggregation changes, remove old value, insert new)
2025-08-27 11:18:54 -05:00
TcMits
4ddfdb2a62 finish 2025-08-27 14:58:35 +07:00
Pekka Enberg
26ba09c45f Revert "Merge 'Remove double indirection in the Parser' from Pedro Muniz"
This reverts commit 71c1b357e4, reversing
changes made to 6bc568ff69 because it
actually makes things slower.
2025-08-26 14:58:21 +03:00
pedrocarlo
d3240844ec refactor Core to remove the double indirection 2025-08-25 22:59:31 -03:00
Pekka Enberg
e3ffc82a1d core/incremental: Fix expression compiler to use new parser 2025-08-25 17:48:20 +03:00
Glauber Costa
ffab4a89a2 addressed review comments from Jussi 2025-08-25 17:48:17 +03:00
Glauber Costa
097510216e implement the projector operator for DBSP
My goal with this patch is to be able to implement the ProjectOperator
for DBSP circuits using VDBE for expression evaluation.

*not* doing so is dangerous for the following reason: we will end up
with different, subtle, and incompatible behavior between SQLite
expressions if they are used in views versus outside of views.

In fact, even in our prototype had them: our projection tests, which
used to pass, were actually wrong =) (sqlite would return something
different if those functions were executed outside the view context)

For optimization reasons, we single out trivial expressions: they don't
have go through VDBE. Trivial expressions are expressions that only
involve Columns, Literals, and simple operators on elements of the same
type. Even type coercion takes this out of the realm of trivial.

Everything that is not trivial, is then translated with translate_expr -
in the same way SQLite will, and then compiled with VDBE.

We can, over time, make this process much better. There are essentially
infinite opportunities for optimization here. But for now, the main
warts are:
* VDBE execution needs a connection
* There is no good way in VDBE to pass parameters to a program.
* It is almost trivial to pollute the original connection. For example,
  we need to issue HALT for the program to stop, but seeing that halt
  will usually cause the program to try and halt the original program.

Subprograms, like the ones we use in triggers are a possible solution,
but they are much more expensive to execute, especially given that our
execution would essentially have to have a program with no other role
than to wrap the subprogram.

Therefore, what I am doing is:
* There is an in-memory database inside the projection operator (an
  obvious optimization is to share it with *all* projection operators).
* We obtain a connection to that database when the operator is created
* We use that connection to execute our VDBE, which offers a clean, safe
  and isolated way to execute the expression.
* We feed the values to the program manually by editing the registers
  directly.
2025-08-25 17:48:17 +03:00
Glauber Costa
38def26704 Add expr_compiler
To be used in DBSP-based projections. This will compile an expression
to VDBE bytecode and execute it.

To do that we need to add a new type of Expression, which we call a
Register.

This is a way for us to pass parameters to a DBSP program which will be
not columns or literals, but inputs from the DBSP deltas.
2025-08-25 17:48:17 +03:00
Levy A.
ee12ef9fb5 remove unnecessary Box<ast::Select> 2025-08-21 17:20:25 -03:00
Levy A.
4ba1304fb9 complete parser integration 2025-08-21 15:23:59 -03:00
Levy A.
186e2f5d8e switch to new parser 2025-08-21 15:19:16 -03:00
PThorpe92
2c526c4c37 Add io_yield_x macros to reduce boilerplate 2025-08-16 16:14:00 -04:00
pedrocarlo
82b75330bc adjust types.rs util.rs view.rs and mvcc to bubble io 2025-08-13 10:24:55 +03:00
Glauber Costa
770f86e490 move our dbsp-based views to materialized views
We will implement normal SQLite-style view-as-an-alias for
compatibility, and will call our incremental views materialized views.
2025-08-12 14:19:17 -05:00
Pekka Enberg
db54c953bd Merge 'Implement Aggregations for DBSP views' from Glauber Costa
```
turso> create table t(a, b);
turso> insert into t(a,b) values (2,2), (3,3);
turso> insert into t(a,b) values (6,6), (7,7);
turso> insert into t(a,b) values (6,6), (7,7);
turso> create view tt as select b, sum(a) from t where b > 2 group by b;
turso> select * from tt;
┌───┬─────────┐
│ b │ sum (a) │
├───┼─────────┤
│ 3 │       3 │
├───┼─────────┤
│ 6 │      12 │
├───┼─────────┤
│ 7 │      14 │
└───┴─────────┘
turso> insert into t(a,b) values (1,3);
turso> select * from tt;
┌───┬─────────┐
│ b │ sum (a) │
├───┼─────────┤
│ 3 │       4 │
├───┼─────────┤
│ 6 │      12 │
├───┼─────────┤
│ 7 │      14 │
└───┴─────────┘
turso>
```

Closes #2547
2025-08-12 09:52:22 +03:00
Glauber Costa
333c5c435b unify populate
populate now has its own code path to apply changes to the view. It was
okay until now because all we do is filter. But now that we are also
applying aggregations, we'll end up with two disjoint code paths.

A better approach is to just apply the results of our select to the
delta set, and apply it.
2025-08-11 15:06:57 -05:00
Glauber Costa
27c22a64b3 views: implement aggregations
Hook up the AggregateOperator. Also wires up the tracker, allowing us to
verify how much work was done.
2025-08-11 15:06:57 -05:00
Jussi Saurio
a50c799e05 stop silently ignoring unsupported features in incremental view WHERE clauses 2025-08-11 17:44:41 +03:00
Pekka Enberg
62f1fd2038 core/incremental: Make clippy happy 2025-08-11 08:36:53 +03:00
Pekka Enberg
87322ad1e4 core/incremental: Evaluate view expressions
...tests were failing because we are testing with expressions, but
didn't support them.
2025-08-11 08:27:10 +03:00
Glauber Costa
145d6eede7 Implement very basic views using DBSP
This is just the bare minimum that I needed to convince myself that this
approach will work. The only views that we support are slices of the
main table: no aggregations, no joins, no projections.

drop view is implemented.
view population is implemented.
deletes, inserts and updates are implemented.

much like indexes before, a flag must be passed to enable views.
2025-08-10 23:34:04 -05:00
Glauber Costa
d5b7533ff8 Implement a DBSP module
We are not using the DBSP crate because it is very heavy on Tokio and
other dependencies that won't make sense for us to consume.
2025-08-10 23:15:26 -05:00