3670: Fix addition deletion bug r=irevoire a=irevoire
The first commit of this PR is a revert of https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch/pull/3667. It re-enable the auto-batching of addition and deletion of tasks. No new changes have been introduced outside of `milli`. So all the changes you see on the autobatcher have actually already been reviewed.
It fixes https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch/issues/3440.
### What was happening?
The issue was that the `external_documents_ids` generated in the `transform` were used in a very strange way that wasn’t compatible with the deletion of documents.
Instead of doing a clear merge between the external document IDs of the DB and the one returned by the transform + writing it on disk, we were doing some weird tricks with the soft-deleted to avoid writing the fst on disk as much as possible.
The new algorithm may be a bit slower but is way more straightforward and doesn’t change depending on if the soft deletion was used or not. Here is a list of the changes introduced:
1. We now do a clear distinction between the `new_external_documents_ids` coming from the transform and only held on RAM and the `external_documents_ids` coming from the DB.
2. The `new_external_documents_ids` (coming out of the transform) are now represented as an `fst`. We don't need to struggle with the hard, soft distinction + the soft_deleted => That's easier to understand
3. When indexing documents, we merge the `external_documents_ids` coming from the DB and the `new_external_documents_ids` coming from the transform.
### Other things introduced in this PR
Since we constantly have to write small, very specialized fuzzers for this kind of bug, we decided to push the one used to reproduce this bug.
It's not perfect, but it's easy to improve in the future.
It'll also run for as long as possible on every merge on the main branch.
Co-authored-by: Tamo <tamo@meilisearch.com>
Co-authored-by: Loïc Lecrenier <loic.lecrenier@icloud.com>
3550: Delete documents by filter r=irevoire a=dureuill
# Prototype `prototype-delete-by-filter-0`
Usage:
A new route is available under `POST /indexes/{index_uid}/documents/delete` that allows you to delete your documents by filter.
The expected payload looks like that:
```json
{
"filter": "doggo = bernese",
}
```
It'll then enqueue a task in your task queue that'll delete all the documents matching this filter once it's processed.
Here is an example of the associated details;
```json
"details": {
"deletedDocuments": 53,
"originalFilter": "\"doggo = bernese\""
}
```
----------
# Pull Request
## Related issue
Related to https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch/issues/3477
## What does this PR do?
### User standpoint
- Modifies the `/indexes/{:indexUid}/documents/delete-batch` route to accept either the existing array of documents ids, or a JSON object with a `filter` field representing a filter to apply. If that latter variant is used, any document matching the filter will be deleted.
### Implementation standpoint
- (processing time version) Adds a new BatchKind that is not autobatchable and that performs the delete by filter
- Reuse the `documentDeletion` task with a new `originalFilter` detail that replaces the `providedIds` detail.
## Example
<details>
<summary>Sample request, response and task result</summary>
Request:
```
curl \
-X POST 'http://localhost:7700/indexes/index-10/documents/delete-batch' \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
--data-binary '{ "filter" : "mass = 600"}'
```
Response:
```
{
"taskUid": 3902,
"indexUid": "index-10",
"status": "enqueued",
"type": "documentDeletion",
"enqueuedAt": "2023-02-28T20:50:31.667502Z"
}
```
Task log:
```json
{
"uid": 3906,
"indexUid": "index-12",
"status": "succeeded",
"type": "documentDeletion",
"canceledBy": null,
"details": {
"deletedDocuments": 3,
"originalFilter": "\"mass = 600\""
},
"error": null,
"duration": "PT0.001819S",
"enqueuedAt": "2023-03-07T08:57:20.11387Z",
"startedAt": "2023-03-07T08:57:20.115895Z",
"finishedAt": "2023-03-07T08:57:20.117714Z"
}
```
</details>
## Draft status
- [ ] Error handling
- [ ] Analytics
- [ ] Do we want to reuse the `delete-batch` route in this way, or create a new route instead?
- [ ] Should the filter be applied at request time or when the deletion task is processed?
- The first commit in this PR applies the filter at request time, meaning that even if a document is modified in a way that no longer matches the filter in a later update, it will be deleted as long as the deletion task is processed after that update.
- The other commits in this PR apply the filter only when the asynchronous deletion task is processed, meaning that documents that match the filter at processing time are deleted even if they didn't match the filter at request time.
- [ ] If keeping the filter at request time, find a more elegant way to recover the user document ids from the internal document ids. The current way implemented in the first commit of this PR involves getting all the documents matching the filter, looking for the value of their primary key, and turning it into a string by copy-pasting routines found in milli...
- [ ] Security consideration, if any
- [ ] Fix the tests (but waiting until product questions are resolved)
- [ ] Add delete by filter specific tests
Co-authored-by: Louis Dureuil <louis@meilisearch.com>
Co-authored-by: Tamo <tamo@meilisearch.com>
3639: Add a dedicated error variant for planned failures in index scheduler tests r=Kerollmops a=Sufflope
# Pull Request
## Related issue
Fixes#3086
## What does this PR do?
- Add a dedicated test variant in test cfg to avoid reusing a misleading existing error
## PR checklist
Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:
- [x] Does this PR fix an existing issue, or have you listed the changes applied in the PR description (and why they are needed)?
- [x] Have you read the contributing guidelines?
- [x] Have you made sure that the title is accurate and descriptive of the changes?
Thank you so much for contributing to Meilisearch!
Co-authored-by: Jean-Sébastien Bour <jean-sebastien@bour.name>
3688: Following release v1.1.1: bring back changes into `main` r=curquiza a=curquiza
`@meilisearch/engine-team` ensure the changes we bring to `main` are the ones you want
Co-authored-by: Louis Dureuil <louis@meilisearch.com>
Co-authored-by: bors[bot] <26634292+bors[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Tamo <tamo@meilisearch.com>
Co-authored-by: dureuill <dureuill@users.noreply.github.com>
3659: stops receiving tasks once the task queue is full r=Kerollmops a=irevoire
Give 20GiB to the task queue + once 50% of the task queue is used, it blocks itself and only receives task deletion requests to ensure we never get in a state where we can’t do anything.
Also, create a new error message when we reach this case:
```
Meilisearch cannot receive write operations because the size limit of the tasks database has been reached. Please delete tasks to continue performing write operations.
```
Co-authored-by: Tamo <tamo@meilisearch.com>
3319: Transparently resize indexes on MaxDatabaseSizeReached errors r=Kerollmops a=dureuill
# Pull Request
## Related issue
Related to https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch/discussions/3280, depends on https://github.com/meilisearch/milli/pull/760
## What does this PR do?
### User standpoint
- Meilisearch no longer fails tasks that encounter the `milli::UserError(MaxDatabaseSizeReached)` error.
- Instead, these tasks are retried after increasing the maximum size allocated to the index where the failure occurred.
### Implementation standpoint
- Add `Batch::index_uid` to get the `index_uid` of a batch of task if there is one
- `IndexMapper::create_or_open_index` now takes an additional `size` argument that allows to (re)open indexes with a size different from the base `IndexScheduler::index_size` field
- `IndexScheduler::tick` now returns a `Result<TickOutcome>` instead of a `Result<usize>`. This offers more explicit control over what the behavior should be wrt the next tick.
- Add `IndexStatus::BeingResized` that contains a handle that a thread can use to await for the resize operation to complete and the index to be available again.
- Add `IndexMapper::resize_index` to increase the size of an index.
- In `IndexScheduler::tick`, intercept task batches that failed due to `MaxDatabaseSizeReached` and resize the index that caused the error, then request a new tick that will eventually handle the still enqueued task.
## Testing the PR
The following diff can be applied to this branch to make testing the PR easier:
<details>
```diff
diff --git a/index-scheduler/src/index_mapper.rs b/index-scheduler/src/index_mapper.rs
index 553ab45a..022b2f00 100644
--- a/index-scheduler/src/index_mapper.rs
+++ b/index-scheduler/src/index_mapper.rs
`@@` -228,13 +228,15 `@@` impl IndexMapper {
drop(lock);
+ std:🧵:sleep_ms(2000);
+
let current_size = index.map_size()?;
let closing_event = index.prepare_for_closing();
- log::info!("Resizing index {} from {} to {} bytes", name, current_size, current_size * 2);
+ log::error!("Resizing index {} from {} to {} bytes", name, current_size, current_size * 2);
closing_event.wait();
- log::info!("Resized index {} from {} to {} bytes", name, current_size, current_size * 2);
+ log::error!("Resized index {} from {} to {} bytes", name, current_size, current_size * 2);
let index_path = self.base_path.join(uuid.to_string());
let index = self.create_or_open_index(&index_path, None, 2 * current_size)?;
`@@` -268,8 +270,10 `@@` impl IndexMapper {
match index {
Some(Available(index)) => break index,
Some(BeingResized(ref resize_operation)) => {
+ log::error!("waiting for resize end");
// Deadlock: no lock taken while doing this operation.
resize_operation.wait();
+ log::error!("trying our luck again!");
continue;
}
Some(BeingDeleted) => return Err(Error::IndexNotFound(name.to_string())),
diff --git a/index-scheduler/src/lib.rs b/index-scheduler/src/lib.rs
index 11b17d05..242dc095 100644
--- a/index-scheduler/src/lib.rs
+++ b/index-scheduler/src/lib.rs
`@@` -908,6 +908,7 `@@` impl IndexScheduler {
///
/// Returns the number of processed tasks.
fn tick(&self) -> Result<TickOutcome> {
+ log::error!("ticking!");
#[cfg(test)]
{
*self.run_loop_iteration.write().unwrap() += 1;
diff --git a/meilisearch/src/main.rs b/meilisearch/src/main.rs
index 050c825a..63f312f6 100644
--- a/meilisearch/src/main.rs
+++ b/meilisearch/src/main.rs
`@@` -25,7 +25,7 `@@` fn setup(opt: &Opt) -> anyhow::Result<()> {
#[actix_web::main]
async fn main() -> anyhow::Result<()> {
- let (opt, config_read_from) = Opt::try_build()?;
+ let (mut opt, config_read_from) = Opt::try_build()?;
setup(&opt)?;
`@@` -56,6 +56,8 `@@` We generated a secure master key for you (you can safely copy this token):
_ => (),
}
+ opt.max_index_size = byte_unit::Byte::from_str("1MB").unwrap();
+
let (index_scheduler, auth_controller) = setup_meilisearch(&opt)?;
#[cfg(all(not(debug_assertions), feature = "analytics"))]
```
</details>
Mainly, these debug changes do the following:
- Set the default index size to 1MiB so that index resizes are initially frequent
- Turn some logs from info to error so that they can be displayed with `--log-level ERROR` (hiding the other infos)
- Add a long sleep between the beginning and the end of the resize so that we can observe the `BeingResized` index status (otherwise it would never come up in my tests)
## Open questions
- Is the growth factor of x2 the correct solution? For a `Vec` in memory it makes sense, but here we're manipulating quantities that are potentially in the order of 500GiBs. For bigger indexes it may make more sense to add at most e.g. 100GiB on each resize operation, avoiding big steps like 500GiB -> 1TiB.
## PR checklist
Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:
- [ ] Does this PR fix an existing issue, or have you listed the changes applied in the PR description (and why they are needed)?
- [ ] Have you read the contributing guidelines?
- [ ] Have you made sure that the title is accurate and descriptive of the changes?
Thank you so much for contributing to Meilisearch!
3470: Autobatch addition and deletion r=irevoire a=irevoire
This PR adds the capability to meilisearch to batch document addition and deletion together.
Fix https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch/issues/3440
--------------
Things to check before merging;
- [x] What happens if we delete multiple time the same documents -> add a test
- [x] If a documentDeletion gets batched with a documentAddition but the index doesn't exist yet? It should not work
Co-authored-by: Louis Dureuil <louis@meilisearch.com>
Co-authored-by: Tamo <tamo@meilisearch.com>
