NAME
ObjStore::Internals - a few notes on the implementation
SYNOPSIS
You don't have to understand anything about the technical implementation. Just know that:
ObjectStoreis outrageously powerful; sophisticated; and even over-engineered.The perl interface is optimized to be fun and easy. Since
ObjectStoreis also blindingly fast, you can happily leave relational databases to collect dust on the bookshelf where they belong.
So basically, you don't have to understand anything to a greater depth. It's not necessary. You've already arrived and you will be successful. On the other hand, some people want more. They like to turn things inside-out. These are my kind of people. In this case, read on!
DESCRIPTION
Perl & C++ APIs: What's The Difference?
Most stuff should be roughly the same. The few exceptions have generally arisen because there was a perl way to make the interface more programmer friendly.
Transactions are perlified.
Some static methods sit directly under
ObjStore::instead of under their own classes. (Easier to import.)Databases are always blessed according to your pleasure.
lookup,open,is_open, andlock_timeoutare augmented with multi-color, pop-tart style interfaces.
Why not just store perl data with the usual perl structures?
CHANGE CONTROL
As perl evolves, new data layouts are introduced. These changes must not cause database compatibility problems.
BINARY COMPATIBILITY
Perl doesn't have to worry about binary compatibility between platforms. Databases do. In addition, databases impose a number of restrictions on persistent data layout that would be onerous and sub-optimal if adopted by perl.
MEMORY USAGE
Perl often trades memory for speed. This is the wrong trade for a database. Memory usage is much more of a concern when data sets can be as large or larger than ten million megabytes. A few percent difference in compactness can be quite noticable.
Representation
All values take a minimum of 8 bytes (OSSV). These 8 bytes are used to store 16-bits of type information, a pointer, and a general purpose 16-bit value.
value stored extra allocation (in addition to OSSV)
------------------------------ -------------------------------------
undef none
pointer none
16-bit signed integers none
32-bit signed integers 4 byte block (OSPV_iv)
double 8 byte block (OSPV_nv)
string length of string (char*)
object (ref or container) sizeof object (see subclasses of OSSVPV)
additional references take no extra space
bless .5-1k bytes per class (zero per object)
%ObjStore::sizeof XXXSince 32-bit integers and doubles are fairly common and should be stored densely, a pool allocation algorithm is planned.
The ODI FAQ also states: In addition, there is an associated entry in the info segment for the segment in question for each allocation of the object. This is done in the tag table. The overhead is 16 bits (i.e., 2 bytes) for each singleton (i.e., non-array) allocation, 32 bits for each character array allocation for character arrays <= 255 characters, and 48 bits for each character array allocation > 255 characters, or any array allocation of an object of another type. Also, depending on the size of an object (i.e., if you allocate a "huge" object - one that is >64Kb) there is other overhead caused by alignment constraints.
If this seems like a lot of overhead, consider that it is not really possible to directly compare these numbers to RDBMS statistics. (Part of the problem is that RDBMS vendors can't even give you these statistics.) At least note that relational data can be stored with much less duplication when moved into ObjectStore. This is unquestionably true when you tailor your own C++ extensions to fit the data and access patterns.
Hard-Coded Limits
Reference counts are only 32 bits unsigned. (The first person to hit this limit in a real application will receive a check from me for $32. Please submit a one page description of your application for judging. :-)
Strings are limited to a length of 32767 bytes. (This limit will be relaxed in a future version.)
Bless
If you are a suspicious person (like my mom) you might have suspected that the ObjStore module installs its own version of bless. Natually it does! The augmented bless implements extra quality assurance to insure that blessings are correctly stored persistently. For example:
package Scottie;
use ObjStore;
use base 'ObjStore::HV';
$VERSION = '2.00';
sub new {
my ($class, $store) = @_;
my $o = $class->SUPER::new($store, { fur => 'buffy' });
$o;
}
package main;
my Scottie $dog = Scottie->new($db);
# once a Scottie, always a ScottiePersistent bless also does some extra work to make evolution easier. It stores the current @ISA tree along with the $VERSION of every class in the @ISA tree. Furthermore, the isa method is tweaked such that it reports according to the moment of the bless. Similarly, the versionof method lets you query the saved $VERSIONs. This is helpful when doing evolution, as you can compare the old @ISA and $VERSIONs to figure out what to change (and how). UNIVERSAL::can is unmodified.
Technically speaking, bless is re-implemented such that it can be extended by the bless from and the bless to classes via the BLESS method. Both the bless from and bless to operations are funnelled through a single BLESS method like this:
sub BLESS {
my ($r1,$r2);
if (ref $r1) { warn "$r1 leaving ".ref $r1." for a new life in $r2\n"; }
else { warn "$r2 entering $r1\n"; }
$r1->SUPER::BLESS($r2);
}UNLOADED
Generic tools such as posh or ospeek must bless objects when reading from an arbitrary database. To bless, there must be support code. To try to get support code, classes found in the database are require'd. However, the require may fail. A package must be faked-up and ${"${package}::UNLOADED"} is set to true. This signals that the @ISA tree should not be considered authoritative for a particular package.
Go Extension Crazy
You cannot directly access persistent scalars from perl. They are always immediately copied into transient scalars. This is actually faster than the alternatives in most cases.
While all persistent objects are blessed, they are not considered blessed in the database unless they are members of some non-default class (not os_class). NOREFS is not invoked on non-blessed database objects.
$ObjStore::COMPILE_TIME XXX
ObjStore::File will be the base class for large binary data.
Each subclass of ObjStore::UNIVERSAL::Container has a %REP hash. The new method decides on the best representation, calls the best creation function from the %REP hash, returning the newly minted persistent object.
Add your own C++ representation. New families of objects can inherit from ObjStore::UNIVERSAL. Suppose you want highly optimized, persistent bit vectors? Or matrics? No problem.
ObjStore::Index
Indices are extremely efficient because they do not copy their keys. It is critical that another pointer to OSSVs is not stored, since OSSVs can be relocated when arrays need to grow. OSSVPVs are never relocated. OTOH, OSSVPVs should be able to change representations. Hm..
Notes On The Source Code
Functions or methods starting with '_' are internal to the
ObjStoreextension. They are subject to change (entirely) without notice.Avoid
const, privacy & templates.C++sucks! Long liveC++!The relationship between references and cursors is strange. It's probably best not to think about it.
BUGS
UNFORGEABLE NOTIFICATION SENDER INFORMATION
ODI feature request #13632: It would be very useful to know which client sent a given notification. While the client could fill in this information as part of the notification, the
osserveralready knows the sender's client# and could pass this information transparently to subscribers. The additional overhead be just 2 bytes per received notification.CROSS DATABASE POINTERS
This feature is highly depreciated and will likely be discontinued, but at the moment you can allow cross database pointers with:
$db->_allow_external_pointers; #never do this!But you should avoid this if at all possible. Using real pointers will affect refcnts, even between two different databases. Your refcnts will be wrong if you simply
osrma random database. This will cause some of your data to become permenently un-deletable. Currently, there is no way to safely delete un-deletable data.Instead, you can use references or cursors to refer to data in other databases. References may use the
os_reference_protectedclass which is designed precisely to address this problem. Refcnts will not be updated remotely, but you'll still be protected from accessing deleted objects or removed databases. (Imagine the freedom. :-)LEAKS TRANSIENT
XPVRVsThe problem is thoroughly understood. Work-arounds or a real fix have been discussed on the perl5-porters mailing list. Well designed mechanisms are being developed to solve this problem correctly. [Fixed?]
ObjStore::AVHVEVOLUTIONIndexed records temporarily cannot be evolved due to const-ness. For now, it is recommended that records be removed, changed, and re-added to the table when changing indexed fields.
os_protected_referenceAllocates persistent memory that cannot be reclaimed without destroying the segment. This makes it non-trival to determine whether a segment is empty or not. The needed change is listed as ODI feature request
#SE055496_O#.WIN32
Threads will not work until perl has a well-tested API for an externally created thread to call into the perl interpreter. (The beginnings of this are there in the form of new_struct_thread(), but it still needs a bit work.)
MOPThis is not a general purpose
ObjectStoreeditor with completeMOPsupport. Actually, I don't think this is a bug!HIGH VOLITILITY
Everything is subject to change without notice. (But backward compatibility will be preserved when possible. :-)
POOR QUALITY DOCUMENTATION
I didn't get a Ph.D in English. Sorry!
SOURCE CODE AVAILABILITY
This section is not a legal contract. This section is not a legal statement in any way, shape, or form.
While there have been gains in software quality in the form of GNU, Perl, Apache, Linux, Qt, and recently the Netscape browser (potentially), we have been in the dark ages with respect to database technology. After avoiding relational databases for years, I sensed a combination of ObjectStore and Perl could offer the same level of quality and simplicity that I find invaluable in addressing the hurdles I face as a software professional.
It might seem obvious in hindsight (doesn't it always?!), but it is my conviction that it was something in particular (not just luck!) that encouraged me imagine and implement this cutting-edge technology years before it would be recognized and adopted. Therefore, I would like to say "thank you!" to all the wonderful teachers with whom I've had the opportunity of studying. My ideas are truly theirs. While I predict that this software will be considered a world-class inter-disciplinary achievement, I do not see it as such. Rather, I see it as a simple mechanical exercise employed to bring me to a basic level of clear understanding. My subsequent hope is that people who use this software will also be able to learn from its clarity. But what are my real aspirations?
I should keep quiet about that but I can say this much: One of my friends had an email signature: "Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code." (Imagine, "computational metaphysics" :-) In using this module, you might feel a hint of it? That's my real interest. You might also be interested!? Perhaps even interested in understanding more (even beyond the bounds of all thought and limitations)? "With our thoughts we make the world." Perhaps it's not common knowledge, but some things don't require belief to be true. If you want to find out for yourself (first hand), I would strongly encourage such an inquiry. You must seriously consider the hard, imporant questions in concert with a well regarded teacher. If you have never studied in this way, I highly recommend it. (It is an opportunity that is also priceless.) And I guarantee that if you look sincerely you will find what you seek. (Or I'll give you double your money back. :-) Trust me, it's worth it.
In fact, one of the main reasons I bothered to kill myself developing this software (and foolishly giving it away for free!) is that I wanted to emphasize this point as strongly as possible. There is nothing more important to me. And yet on the other hand, I know that other people may have different priorities. That is okay. You are welcome to use this software even if you are interested exclusively in satisfying your own greed (it will work wonders :-). However, I have an obligation to state the truth. You can either be part of the problem or part of the solution. And what is at stake is much more significant, much bigger than you think. Designing software requires a basic subtlety of awareness: to be successful, you must be able to fluctuate fluidly between the place of reason and the place of silent knowledge. The place of concern is the forerunner to the place of reason. Similarly, the place of unbending intent is the forerunner to the place of silent knowledge. Yet, this technique, in my opinion, is (worse than?) worthless unless it is properly directed at trying to answer the hard, important questions. If you continue to persist in not caring very much, you will find out what is the result. Your life will be become the result! But always I wish everyone well and the best of luck. :-) You have been warned, but will you take action?