Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Mon, 26 Mar 2018 10:50:36 -0700] rev 37291
wireproto: define frame to represent progress updates
Today, a long-running operation on a server may run without any sign
of progress on the client. This can lead to the conclusion that the
server has hung or the connection has dropped. In fact, connections
can and do time out due to inactivity. And a long-running server
operation can result in the connection dropping prematurely because
no data is being sent!
While we're inventing the new wire protocol, let's provide a mechanism
for communicating progress on potentially expensive server-side events.
We introduce a new frame type that conveys "progress" updates. This
frame type essentially holds the data required to formulate a
``ui.progress()`` call.
We only define the frame right now. Implementing it will be a bit of
work since there is no analog to progress frames in the existing
wire protocol. We'll need to teach the ui object to write to the
wire protocol, etc.
The use of a CBOR map may seem wasteful, as this will encode key
names in every frame. This *is* wasteful. However, maps are
extensible. And the intent is to always use compression via
streams. Compression will make the overhead negligible since repeated
strings will be mostly eliminated over the wire.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2902
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Wed, 28 Mar 2018 15:05:39 -0700] rev 37290
wireproto: syntax for encoding CBOR into frames
We just vendored a library for encoding and decoding the CBOR
data format. While the intent of that vendor was to support state
files, CBOR is really a nice data format. It is extensible and
compact.
I've been feeling dirty inventing my own data formats for
frame payloads. While custom formats can always beat out a generic
format, there is a cost to be paid in terms of implementation,
comprehension, etc. CBOR is compact enough that I'm not too
worried about efficiency loss. I think the benefits of using
a standardized format outweigh rolling our own formats. So
I plan to make heavy use of CBOR in the wire protocol going
forward.
This commit introduces support for encoding CBOR data in frame
payloads to our function to make a frame from a human string.
We do need to employ some low-level Python code in order to
evaluate a string as a Python expression. But other than that,
this should hopefully be pretty straightforward.
Unit tests for this function have been added.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2948
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Mon, 26 Mar 2018 13:59:56 -0700] rev 37289
wireproto: explicit API to create outgoing streams
It is better to create outgoing streams through the reactor so the
reactor knows about what streams are active and can track them
accordingly.
Test output changes slightly because frames from subsequent responses
no longer have the "stream begin" stream flag set because the stream
is now used across all responses.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2947
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Mon, 26 Mar 2018 11:00:16 -0700] rev 37288
wireproto: add streams to frame-based protocol
Previously, the frame-based protocol was just a series of frames,
with each frame associated with a request ID.
In order to scale the protocol, we'll want to enable the use of
compression. While it is possible to enable compression at the
socket/pipe level, this has its disadvantages. The big one is it
undermines the point of frames being standalone, atomic units that
can be read and written: if you add compression above the framing
protocol, you are back to having a stream-based protocol as opposed
to something frame-based.
So in order to preserve frames, compression needs to occur at
the frame payload level.
Compressing each frame's payload individually will limit compression
ratios because the window size of the compressor will be limited
by the max frame size, which is 32-64kb as currently defined. It
will also add CPU overhead, as it is more efficient for compressors
to operate on fewer, larger blocks of data than more, smaller blocks.
So compressing each frame independently is out.
This means we need to compress each frame's payload as if it is part
of a larger stream.
The simplest approach is to have 1 stream per connection. This
could certainly work. However, it has disadvantages (documented below).
We could also have 1 stream per RPC/command invocation. (This is the
model HTTP/2 goes with.) This also has disadvantages.
The main disadvantage to one global stream is that it has the very
real potential to create CPU bottlenecks doing compression. Networks
are only getting faster and the performance of single CPU cores has
been relatively flat. Newer compression formats like zstandard offer
better CPU cycle efficiency than predecessors like zlib. But it still
all too common to saturate your CPU with compression overhead long
before you saturate the network pipe.
The main disadvantage with streams per request is that you can't
reap the benefits of the compression context for multiple requests.
For example, if you send 1000 RPC requests (or HTTP/2 requests for
that matter), the response to each would have its own compression
context. The overall size of the raw responses would be larger because
compression contexts wouldn't be able to reference data from another
request or response.
The approach for streams as implemented in this commit is to support
N streams per connection and for streams to potentially span requests
and responses. As explained by the added internals docs, this
facilitates servers and clients delegating independent streams and
compression to independent threads / CPU cores. This helps alleviate
the CPU bottleneck of compression. This design also allows compression
contexts to be reused across requests/responses. This can result in
improved compression ratios and less overhead for compressors and
decompressors having to build new contexts.
Another feature that was defined was the ability for individual frames
within a stream to declare whether that individual frame's payload
uses the content encoding (read: compression) defined by the stream.
The idea here is that some servers may serve data from a combination
of caches and dynamic resolution. Data coming from caches may be
pre-compressed. We want to facilitate servers being able to essentially
stream bytes from caches to the wire with minimal overhead. Being
able to mix and match with frames are compressed within a stream
enables these types of advanced server functionality.
This commit defines the new streams mechanism. Basic code for
supporting streams in frames has been added. But that code is
seriously lacking and doesn't fully conform to the defined protocol.
For example, we don't close any streams. And support for content
encoding within streams is not yet implemented. The change was
rather invasive and I didn't think it would be reasonable to implement
the entire feature in a single commit.
For the record, I would have loved to reuse an existing multiplexing
protocol to build the new wire protocol on top of. However, I couldn't
find a protocol that offers the performance and scaling characteristics
that I desired. Namely, it should support multiple compression
contexts to facilitate scaling out to multiple CPU cores and
compression contexts should be able to live longer than single RPC
requests. HTTP/2 *almost* fits the bill. But the semantics of HTTP
message exchange state that streams can only live for a single
request-response. We /could/ tunnel on top of HTTP/2 streams and
frames with HEADER and DATA frames. But there's no guarantee that
HTTP/2 libraries and proxies would allow us to use HTTP/2 streams
and frames without the HTTP message exchange semantics defined in
RFC 7540 Section 8. Other RPC protocols like gRPC tunnel are built
on top of HTTP/2 and thus preserve its semantics of stream per
RPC invocation. Even QUIC does this. We could attempt to invent a
higher-level stream that spans HTTP/2 streams. But this would be
violating HTTP/2 because there is no guarantee that HTTP/2 streams
are routed to the same server. The best we can do - which is what
this protocol does - is shoehorn all request and response data into
a single HTTP message and create streams within. At that point, we've
defined a Content-Type in HTTP parlance. It just so happens our
media type can also work as a standalone, stream-based protocol,
without leaning on HTTP or similar protocol.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2907
Augie Fackler <raf@durin42.com> [Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:35:09 -0400] rev 37287
Added signature for changeset
7de7bd407251
Augie Fackler <raf@durin42.com> [Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:35:09 -0400] rev 37286
Added tag 4.5.3 for changeset
7de7bd407251
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Mon, 26 Mar 2018 13:57:22 -0700] rev 37285
wireproto: start to associate frame generation with a stream
An upcoming commit will introduce "streams" into the frame-based wire
protocol. In preparation for this invasive change, we introduce a basic
"stream" class and have all operations that create frames also operate
alongside a stream instance.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2906
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Mon, 26 Mar 2018 13:51:22 -0700] rev 37284
tests: fix duplicate and failing test
There were two "testconflictingrequestid" methods. Naturally this isn't
an error in Python. And by our luck, the test was failing.
So we rename the test and fix it to pass.
As part of this, _sendsingleframe() now takes a frame, not a string
describing the frame. This is better because action at a distance can
be confusing.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2950
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Mon, 02 Apr 2018 16:47:53 -0700] rev 37283
debugcommands: drop offset and length from debugindex by default
These fields are an implementation detail of revlog storage. As
such, they are not part of the generic storage "index" interface
and shouldn't be displayed by default.
Because we don't have another way to display these fields, we've
retained support for printing these fields via --verbose.
Yes, I know we should probably be doing all this formatting using
modern formatting/templater APIs. I didn't feel like scope
bloating this patch.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D3028
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Mon, 02 Apr 2018 16:28:20 -0700] rev 37282
debugcommands: drop base revision from debugindex
Revlog index data consists of generic index metadata that will
likely be implemented across all storage engines and revlog-specifc
metadata.
Most tests printing index data only care about the generic fields.
This commit drops the printing of the base revision from
`hg debugindex`. This value is an implementation detail of
revlogs / delta chains. If tests are interested in verifying this
implementation detail, `hg debugdeltachain` is a better command.
Most tests were skipping over this field anyway. Tests that weren't
looked like they were newer. So my guess is we forgot to make them
skip the field to match the style of the older tests. This reinforces
my belief that the base revision is not worth having in
`hg debugindex`.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D3027
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Mon, 02 Apr 2018 16:24:57 -0700] rev 37281
tests: use debugdeltachain where appropriate
Some tests are verifying delta chain type things. This metadata
has more to do with a revlog implementation details than index
data, which is theoretically generic.
This commit ports some tests to `hg debugdeltachain`, as it is the
more appropriate debug command for looking at delta metadata.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D3026
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Mon, 02 Apr 2018 15:55:50 -0700] rev 37280
tests: don't use revlog paths in tests
Debug commands operating on revlogs don't need the full revlog
path: they can accept the relative path to a tracked file or use
-c/-m to specify a changelog or manifest.
Not using the revlog path makes tests more resilient to cases
where revlogs aren't being used for storage.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D3025
Yuya Nishihara <yuya@tcha.org> [Sat, 17 Mar 2018 21:03:16 +0900] rev 37279
templater: define interface for objects requiring unwrapvalue()
unwrapvalue() is changed to not return a lazy bytes generator for "wrapped"
types because I want to define the tovalue() interface as such. It's a baby
step to unify unwrapvalue() and _unwrapvalue().
Yuya Nishihara <yuya@tcha.org> [Fri, 23 Mar 2018 21:40:16 +0900] rev 37278
templater: extract private function to evaluate generator to byte string
Yuya Nishihara <yuya@tcha.org> [Sun, 18 Mar 2018 23:14:21 +0900] rev 37277
templater: pass (context, mapping) down to unwrapvalue()
The same reason as why I made unwraphybrid() take a (context, mapping) pair.