-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 100
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Release/candidate/v0.9.1 #1233
Closed
Closed
Release/candidate/v0.9.1 #1233
Conversation
This file contains 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
…1085) * Table: skip alignment checks in eq_row_in_page and hash_row_in_page * Whoops, those comments can stay the same.
Fix a minor bug where completely empty transactions would still be written to the commitlog. The bug is minor because, once we start logging inputs, all transactions will be non-empty. The check is done in relational DB rather than the durability crate, because in principle empty transactions are permissible, and may be used in the future (e.g. to confirm a certain offset).
* Fix iai-callgrind rustc version mismatch * Two spaces * Future-proof
- Arcing `TableSchema`, and this has benefits elsewhere too. - Arc<[_]>ing the visitor program instructions. The data behind the Arcs very rarely change, which is the perfect case for an Arc.
* Slow query log * Addressing some PR comments
Prerequisite for auto-disconnect after a database crash, requested for analytics purposes.
* slow query log: only use Instant::now when needed + refactor * address Joshua's review
Closes #1115. Previously subscribers were only identified by their Identity. However the same Identity can be associated to different Addresses.
* durability: Introduce a method to obtain the max tx offset of a history Useful for reporting replay progress. Include note that it is somewhat similar to `std::iter::Iterator::size_hint`. * core: Re-instantiate replay progress reporting The percentage is calculated as starting from the zero offset, although that may change in the future.
When a server key rotation is suspected, suggest to make the new identity the default. This usually happens during development using an ephemeral instance. If one follows the instructions, the `default_identity` is not set for the existing server, which makes the CLI generate a fresh identity every time. See also: #333
Traversing the commitlog without also making it available for writing would still require upfront I/O imposed by the `open` constructor. Avoid that by introducing free-standing functions which start traversal right away.
Co-authored-by: John Detter <no-reply@boppygames.gg>
Avoids an unnecessary roundtrip through `Vec<u8>` in private#731.
Co-authored-by: John Detter <no-reply@boppygames.gg>
Co-authored-by: John Detter <no-reply@boppygames.gg>
…rver> (#1131) Co-authored-by: John Detter <no-reply@boppygames.gg>
- Nix len-prefixing in `Hash for ProductValue` - Ignore discriminants in `Hash for ArrayValue`
This adds a non-fallible `write_fmt` method to `CodeIndenter<String>` (since we know it should never fail), which allows to use `write!` and `writeln!` without `.unwrap()` everywhere, making code a lot less noisy.
While working on the new C# codegen, I accidentally noticed that those tests were passing even when they clearly should've been failing due to changed output. After running with `--nocapture`, I found out it's because the tests are silently skipped and reported as successful when `rust_wasm_test.wasm` isn't built. This further led to finding that `rust_wasm_test.wasm` is never built - the relevant module results in `rust_wasm_test_module.wasm` instead - so these tests have been incorrectly passing for ages. This PR changes them to actually build the module as part of testing and updates the snapshots to latest master.
While looking through the large diffs while splitting out small PRs out of my refactor branch, I noticed that quite a lot of noise is from me working on a formatted code and using primary constructors while the one in master is not. As such, I'm splitting out just those automated / non-functional changes into a separate PR to make subsequent functional diffs easier to read.
* [bfops/tests-use-explicit-server]: fix? * [bfops/tests-use-explicit-server]: empty --------- Co-authored-by: Zeke Foppa <github.com/bfops>
Const members shouldn't count as table or type fields in `[SpacetimeDB.Type]`.
* Disallow calling random lifecycle reducers * Add lifecycle reducer smoketest
Fixes #1170. Also updates the bucket values for the queue length histogram. Also removes the max queue length metric, since the histogram should suffice.
Fixes #1173. Previously we were only recording this metric for scheduled reducers. We were also recording it before we acquired access to the module instance. Now we record it for all reducers after we acquire access to the module instance. This patch also removes max wait time since the histogram should suffice.
* NFC: few more C# shorthand conversions For some reason these automated refactoring conversions didn't get included in #1149. * Also remove unused usings * Restore a using that was erroneously marked as unused
2. Make `RowRef::row_hash` use the above. 3. Make `Table::insert` return a `RowRef`. 4. Use less unsafe because of 1-3. 5. Use `second-stack` to reuse temporary allocations in hashing and serialization.
Reuse the `indented_block` helper more and add new `CsharpAutogen` helper structure for consistent header / footer structure and reduced boilerplate.
* redefine FieldName as (TableId, ColId) * fix & refactor tests + move MemTable/Header test helpers test code
bfops
added
the
Do not merge
Do not merge PRs with this label without coordinating further
label
May 14, 2024
coolreader18
force-pushed
the
release/candidate/v0.9.1
branch
from
May 14, 2024 18:01
dccad31
to
987cb68
Compare
* Add SDK test for `SELECT * FROM *` Which doesn't pass, because we broke it. * Fix select * from * --------- Co-authored-by: Phoebe Goldman <phoebe@goldman-tribe.org>
…s/bump-version' into release/candidate/v0.9.1
bfops
force-pushed
the
release/candidate/v0.9.1
branch
from
May 15, 2024 18:08
750d134
to
9de3eef
Compare
…e lock when committing tx to prevent deadlock
bfops
force-pushed
the
release/candidate/v0.9.1
branch
from
May 22, 2024 14:00
65f571f
to
eb09f6e
Compare
Setting to v0.9.0 to match the other nuget package that was published from the SDK
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 of Changes
Please describe your change, mention any related tickets, and so on here.
API and ABI breaking changes
If this is an API or ABI breaking change, please apply the
corresponding GitHub label.
Expected complexity level and risk
How complicated do you think these changes are? Grade on a scale from 1 to 5,
where 1 is a trivial change, and 5 is a deep-reaching and complex change.
This complexity rating applies not only to the complexity apparent in the diff,
but also to its interactions with existing and future code.
If you answered more than a 2, explain what is complex about the PR,
and what other components it interacts with in potentially concerning ways.
Testing
Describe any testing you've done, and any testing you'd like your reviewers to do,
so that you're confident that all the changes work as expected!