So far, the `--clear-database` option to `publish` has simply dropped
and then re-created the database (if it did exist).
This will no longer work when databases can have "children": because
dropping and re-creating is not atomic, children would either become
orphans, or be dropped as well.
To solve this, `reset_database` is introduced as a separate action that:
- shuts down all replicas
- if a `program_bytes` is supplied, replaces the database's initial
program
- if a `host_type` is supplied, replaces the database's host type
- starts `num_replicas` or the previous number of replicas, which
initialize themselves as normal
As this could be its own CLI command, the action is provided as its own
API endpoint (undocumented).
However, since `publish` has no way of knowing whether the database it
operates on actually exists, the `publish_database` handler will just
invoke the `reset_database` handler if `clear=true` and the database
exists, and return its result. This is to avoid starting the transfer of
the program in the request body, only to receive a redirect.
Some refactoring was necessary to dissect and understand the flow.
# API and ABI breaking changes
Introduces a new, undocumented API endpoint.
We may want to nest it under `/unstable`.
# Expected complexity level and risk
2
# Testing
From the outside, the observed behavior should be as before,
so smoketests should cover it.
# Description of Changes
This reverts commit #3496.
# API and ABI breaking changes
Technically maybe yes? But definitely nothing is using the new code yet.
# Expected complexity level and risk
1
# Testing
CI only
Co-authored-by: Zeke Foppa <bfops@users.noreply.github.com>
So far, the `--clear-database` option to `publish` has simply dropped
and then re-created the database (if it did exist).
This will no longer work when databases can have "children": because
dropping and re-creating is not atomic, children would either become
orphans, or be dropped as well.
To solve this, `reset_database` is introduced as a separate action that:
- shuts down all replicas
- if a `program_bytes` is supplied, replaces the database's initial
program
- if a `host_type` is supplied, replaces the database's host type
- starts `num_replicas` or the previous number of replicas, which
initialize themselves as normal
As this could be its own CLI command, the action is provided as its own
API endpoint (undocumented).
However, since `publish` has no way of knowing whether the database it
operates on actually exists, the `publish_database` handler will just
invoke the `reset_database` handler if `clear=true` and the database
exists, and return its result. This is to avoid starting the transfer of
the program in the request body, only to receive a redirect.
Some refactoring was necessary to dissect and understand the flow.
# API and ABI breaking changes
Introduces a new, undocumented API endpoint.
We may want to nest it under `/unstable`.
# Expected complexity level and risk
2
# Testing
From the outside, the observed behavior should be as before,
so smoketests should cover it.
Make it so `HostController` manages both the module host (wasm
machinery) and the database (`RelationalDB` / `DatabaseInstanceContext`)
of spacetime databases deployed to a server.
The `DatabaseInstanceContextController` (DBIC) is removed in the
process.
This allows to make database accesses panic-safe, in that uncaught
panics will cause all resouces to be released and the database to be
restarted on subsequent access. This is a prerequisite for #985.
It also allows to move towards storage of the module binary directly in
the database / commitlog. This patch, however, makes some contortions in
order to **not** introduce a breaking change just yet.
* Rewrite smoketests as python unittests
* Get all tests working and do some work on parallel unittest
* Give up on parallel unittests
* Fix CI + address comments
* Fix skip-clippy arg confusion (just use the env var)
* fix ci
* Add comments
Kim Altintop