Skip to content

Bug 2034605 - Switch to an SQLite storage backend#3504

Merged
badboy merged 48 commits into
mainfrom
main-sqlite
Jun 22, 2026
Merged

Bug 2034605 - Switch to an SQLite storage backend#3504
badboy merged 48 commits into
mainfrom
main-sqlite

Conversation

@badboy

@badboy badboy commented Jun 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

This is essentially #3405 but from the branch we've been slowly merging into:

main <- main-sqlite.

This is what will finally get merged.
It won't need a full review again, all indidivual pieces have been reviewed previously.
This branch is rebased against main to ensure we do not lose any commits from main.

@badboy badboy force-pushed the main-sqlite branch 4 times, most recently from 13689af to 899269d Compare June 17, 2026 12:13
@badboy

badboy commented Jun 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

/run-ios

@badboy badboy added the sqlite Any changes to the new SQLite storage backend label Jun 18, 2026
badboy added 7 commits June 19, 2026 14:40
This is a modified version of the kvstore/skv implementation:
https://searchfox.org/firefox-main/rev/cced10961b53e0d29e22e635404fec37728b2644/toolkit/components/kvstore/src/skv/connection.rs
Which itself is based on application-service's sql-support.

It's stripped down to what we need in Glean:
* A file-backed database
* A schema set up on start, potentially applying migrations if we need that
* A read-write connection, which is re-used for all access.
This only integrates it into the module tree.
It compiles, but not warning-free.
It fully replaces the Rkv storage. No migration implemented.
Now that it's just another column this becomes straight-forward to do.
The bincode crate isn't maintained anymore.
While it's been stable and without issues for us for years,
switching to anotherformat is easy while we're switching the database anyway.
MessagePack can be even smaller than bincode for the same data (just a couple of bytes here and there).

Whether it's actually faster has not been benchmarked. Compared to
everything else the (de)serialization overhead is probably a small
fraction of the whole thing.

Why do we need serialization anyway?
Ping assembly does not have any knowledge of metrics.
It only knows what's in the database.
So in order to put in in the right place in the ping payload we need to know the type of the stored data.
That data needs to be somewhere.
By serializing the whole value (the `Metric` enum) we can deserialize it
into that enum and the serde part takes care of "knowing" the type.
Same way this was done on Rkv: we just some up the size of all files in
the database directory.
@badboy badboy marked this pull request as ready for review June 19, 2026 14:34
@badboy badboy requested a review from a team as a code owner June 19, 2026 14:34
@badboy badboy requested review from jeddai and removed request for a team June 19, 2026 14:34
@badboy

badboy commented Jun 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

/run-ios

@badboy badboy requested review from chutten and travis79 June 19, 2026 14:34

@chutten chutten left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

r+wc

Possible later augmentation: on filesystem errors creating the db, go in-memory (https://sqlite.org/inmemorydb.html) so we're still able to report the failure.

Comment thread glean-core/rlb-tests/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread glean-core/rlb-tests/pings.yaml Outdated
Comment thread glean-core/rlb/src/private/object.rs
Comment thread glean-core/src/core/mod.rs Outdated
Comment thread glean-core/src/core/mod.rs Outdated
Comment thread glean-core/src/internal_metrics.rs Outdated
Comment thread glean-core/tests/sqlite.rs
Comment thread glean-core/tests/sqlite.rs
Comment thread glean-core/tests/sqlite.rs
Comment thread glean-core/tests/sqlite.rs Outdated
@badboy

badboy commented Jun 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

on filesystem errors creating the db, go in-memory

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2049284

badboy added 6 commits June 22, 2026 12:29
…l moments

See all details:
https://sqlite.org/pragma.html#pragma_synchronous

The default (FULL) syncs on every write.
That's slightly higher guarantees, but also costly.
We're already using WAL (write-ahead log). It's safe from corruption in
NORMAL mode and consistent.
It does lose durability, that means data might roll back following a power loss or system crash.

Note: `rkv` does NOT sync at all. It only writes to disk (and moves
files around). That's strictly worse than WAL in `NORMAL` mode.
It's now easier to do: query the column and count.
There's some complications when we get to dual-labeled metrics, but that
comes later.
This will unify label check code: all cases are handled through the same
code paths, just that for the static label variant we don't need to do
any more checks.
badboy added 26 commits June 22, 2026 14:25
It will be applied at start if
(1) no sqlite database is detected, and
(2) an Rkv database is detected.

Migration works by iterating through all data in the rkv "safe-mode" database and inserting it into the new database.
The Rkv database will be kept on disk. This will allow for a rollback if any problems are detected in
production and we can implement a recovery step then.

migrate rename
These tests were disabled because they are very rkv-specific:
Manually opening and writing to an Rkv database in the format that Glean
expects.
Then testing Glean behaves accordingly.

We now do the same, but do it in SQL.
What individual tests do should be clear from their name or further
comments inline.
This currently fails.
The database is locked, so Glean can't access it.
It's unclear how we should handle that.
It's not a particular likely case to happen in practice.
The data was generated with

    cargo run -p glean-tests --bin verify-data -- tmp

on an Rkv-powered Glean checkout.
The database (`tmp/db/data.safe.bin`) was then copied into glean-core/rlb/tests/rkv-database.safe.bin
The previous refactoring duplicated some of the logic between different
parts. Now we unify them again.
@badboy badboy merged commit e8e0b55 into main Jun 22, 2026
29 of 30 checks passed
@badboy badboy deleted the main-sqlite branch June 22, 2026 13:38
badboy added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 22, 2026
This reverts commit e8e0b55, reversing
changes made to 2a2e417.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

sqlite Any changes to the new SQLite storage backend

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants