Add UpdatesOnly query option to fetch data for only changed keys #22108
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
|
tanmayghai18
force-pushed
the
tanmayghai18/add-option-to-only-watch-changed-keys
branch
from
e9953d7 to
87a7836
Compare
As mentioned long ago (and roughly outlined) in hashicorp#2791, a limitation on blocking queries is that all K/V entries matching that prefix are returned, even though only 1 key may have changed. This diff adds a new `UpdatesOnly` option, that when set, introduces server-side filtering to remove all keys/entries (from a `Keys()` or `List()` query) that have an old `ModifyIndex`. It uses `MinQueryIndex` as the threshold here, which follows the effective serialization/deserialization chain: `WaitIndex` --> `index` --> `MinQueryIndex`. - `WaitIndex` being the client-side parameter, determining the index the "client" waits for on a blocking query - `index` being the serialized HTTP query parameter representing the `WaitIndex` - `MinQueryIndex` being the server-side struct (deserialized result of `index`) While we (potentially?) wait for the streaming backend: https://developer.hashicorp.com/consul/api-docs/features/blocking#streaming-backend to be implemented for KV endpoints, this can be a good stop-gap solution to enable in-memory, incremental scans or queries over a prefix.
tanmayghai18
force-pushed
the
tanmayghai18/add-option-to-only-watch-changed-keys
branch
from
87a7836 to
c9997a8
Compare
tanmayghai18
commented
Jan 28, 2025
| reply.QueryMeta.ResultsFilteredByACLs = total != len(ent) | ||
| total := len(entries) | ||
| entries = FilterDirEnt(authz, entries) | ||
| reply.QueryMeta.ResultsFilteredByACLs = total != len(entries) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
open q: similar to how we hydrate ResultsFilteredByACLs in the QueryMeta introduced by #11569, does it make sense to do the same thing here for filtering by query index?
|
This pull request has been automatically flagged for inactivity because it has not been acted upon in the last 60 days. It will be closed if no new activity occurs in the next 30 days. Please feel free to re-open to resurrect the change if you feel this has happened by mistake. Thank you for your contributions. |
github-actions
bot
added
the
meta/stale
|
Closing due to inactivity. If you feel this was a mistake or you wish to re-open at any time in the future, please leave a comment and it will be re-surfaced for the maintainers to review. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
As mentioned long ago (and roughly outlined) in #2791, a limitation on blocking queries is that all K/V entries matching that prefix are returned, even though only 1 key may have changed. This diff adds a new
UpdatesOnlyoption, that when set, introduces server-side filtering to remove all keys/entries (from aKeys()orList()query) that have an oldModifyIndex.It uses
MinQueryIndexas the threshold here, which follows the effective serialization/deserialization chain:WaitIndex-->index-->MinQueryIndex.WaitIndexbeing the client-side parameter, determining the index the "client" waits for on a blocking queryindexbeing the serialized HTTP query parameter representing theWaitIndexMinQueryIndexbeing the server-side struct (deserialized result ofindex)While we (potentially?) wait for the streaming backend: https://developer.hashicorp.com/consul/api-docs/features/blocking#streaming-backend to be implemented for KV endpoints, this can be a good stop-gap solution to enable in-memory, incremental scans or queries over a prefix.
Testing & Reproduction steps
minQueryIndexpassed down the state layer to be 0 (no filtering)state/kvs_test.goto illustrate the filtering based onModifyIndexLinks
Original GH issue: #2791
PR Checklist