-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 948
Fix missing query results when it is a match after a local patch mutation. #1957
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Changes from 2 commits
71f2411
a6b40ba
96aed4d
4c726ef
0a49cd0
a6c5635
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -24,7 +24,8 @@ import { | |
MaybeDocumentMap, | ||
maybeDocumentMap, | ||
NullableMaybeDocumentMap, | ||
nullableMaybeDocumentMap | ||
nullableMaybeDocumentMap, | ||
documentKeySet | ||
} from '../model/collections'; | ||
import { Document, MaybeDocument, NoDocument } from '../model/document'; | ||
import { DocumentKey } from '../model/document_key'; | ||
|
@@ -37,6 +38,7 @@ import { MutationQueue } from './mutation_queue'; | |
import { PersistenceTransaction } from './persistence'; | ||
import { PersistencePromise } from './persistence_promise'; | ||
import { RemoteDocumentCache } from './remote_document_cache'; | ||
import { PatchMutation } from '../model/mutation'; | ||
This conversation was marked as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
||
/** | ||
* A readonly view of the local state of all documents we're tracking (i.e. we | ||
|
@@ -208,6 +210,7 @@ export class LocalDocumentsView { | |
): PersistencePromise<DocumentMap> { | ||
// Query the remote documents and overlay mutations. | ||
let results: DocumentMap; | ||
let mutationBatches: MutationBatch[]; | ||
return this.remoteDocumentCache | ||
.getDocumentsMatchingQuery(transaction, query) | ||
.next(queryResults => { | ||
|
@@ -218,7 +221,43 @@ export class LocalDocumentsView { | |
); | ||
}) | ||
.next(matchingMutationBatches => { | ||
mutationBatches = matchingMutationBatches; | ||
// It is possible that a PatchMutation can make a document a match to the query, | ||
// but the version in `remoteDocumentCache` is not a match yet (waiting for server | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Nit: s/ There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done. |
||
// to ack). To handle this, we find all document keys affected by some`PatchMutation`s | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. s/some There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done. |
||
// that are not in `result` yet, and back fill them via `remoteDocumentCache.getEntries`, | ||
// otherwise those `PatchMutations` will be ignored because no base document can be found, | ||
// and lead to missing result for the query. | ||
This conversation was marked as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
let missingBaseDocEntriesForPatching = documentKeySet(); | ||
This conversation was marked as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
for (const batch of matchingMutationBatches) { | ||
for (const mutation of batch.mutations) { | ||
const key = mutation.key; | ||
// Only process documents belonging to the collection. | ||
if (!query.path.isImmediateParentOf(key.path)) { | ||
continue; | ||
} | ||
if ( | ||
mutation instanceof PatchMutation && | ||
results.get(mutation.key) === null | ||
) { | ||
missingBaseDocEntriesForPatching = missingBaseDocEntriesForPatching.add( | ||
mutation.key | ||
This conversation was marked as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
); | ||
} | ||
} | ||
} | ||
return this.remoteDocumentCache.getEntries( | ||
transaction, | ||
missingBaseDocEntriesForPatching | ||
); | ||
}) | ||
.next(baseDocsForPatching => { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Nit: this variable name is perhaps slightly misleading; without context, it sounds like it contains all base documents, but in fact it's only a subset of those documents (those that have pending writes making them potentially match). Consider renaming ( There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. changed to docsWithPendingPatches. |
||
baseDocsForPatching.forEach((key, doc) => { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Optional: if you decide to follow the suggestion to create a helper function, perhaps you can move this filtering step there as well. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. As i wrote in other reply, i'd like to keep the block as-is. |
||
if (doc !== null && doc instanceof Document) { | ||
results = results.insert(key, doc); | ||
} | ||
}); | ||
for (const batch of mutationBatches) { | ||
for (const mutation of batch.mutations) { | ||
const key = mutation.key; | ||
// Only process documents belonging to the collection. | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -98,4 +98,41 @@ describeSpec('Queries:', [], () => { | |
hasPendingWrites: true | ||
}); | ||
}); | ||
|
||
specTest( | ||
'Ensure correct query results for latency-compensated updates', | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Maybe 'Latency-compensated updates are included in query results'? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done. |
||
[], | ||
() => { | ||
const fullQuery = Query.atPath(ResourcePath.fromString('collection')); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This can be There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done. |
||
const filteredQuery = fullQuery.addFilter(filter('match', '==', true)); | ||
const docA = doc('collection/a', 1000, { match: false }); | ||
const docAv2Local = doc( | ||
'collection/a', | ||
1000, | ||
{ match: true }, | ||
{ hasLocalMutations: true } | ||
); | ||
|
||
return ( | ||
spec() | ||
.userListens(fullQuery) | ||
.watchAcksFull(fullQuery, 1000, docA) | ||
.expectEvents(fullQuery, { added: [docA] }) | ||
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I believe that if you do There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'm not sure i understand..can you explain more? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I am myself no longer fully sold on my idea. But let me explain what I had in mind:
I believe this would work and it would remove the event in line 124 that is not directly related to your change. The reason I am no longer fully sold on this is that you would have to run the test with GC disabled to make this work. Otherwise, the SDK would delete There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yep, can confirm what you described. Without GC disabled this is not working. I am keep it as-is as that is slightly more likely what happens in real world. |
||
// patch docA so that it will now match the filtered query. | ||
.userPatches('collection/a', { match: true }) | ||
.expectEvents(fullQuery, { | ||
modified: [docAv2Local], | ||
hasPendingWrites: true | ||
}) | ||
// Make sure docA shows up in filtered query. | ||
.userListens(filteredQuery) | ||
.expectEvents(filteredQuery, { | ||
added: [docAv2Local], | ||
fromCache: true, | ||
hasPendingWrites: true | ||
}) | ||
); | ||
} | ||
); | ||
}); |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.