2 Commits

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Auke Booij	cdac24c79f	server: delete the Cacheable type class in favor of Eq ... What is the `Cacheable` type class about? ```haskell class Eq a => Cacheable a where unchanged :: Accesses -> a -> a -> Bool default unchanged :: (Generic a, GCacheable (Rep a)) => Accesses -> a -> a -> Bool unchanged accesses a b = gunchanged (from a) (from b) accesses ``` Its only method is an alternative to `(==)`. The added value of `unchanged` (and the additional `Accesses` argument) arises _only_ for one type, namely `Dependency`. Indeed, the `Cacheable (Dependency a)` instance is non-trivial, whereas every other `Cacheable` instance is completely boilerplate (and indeed either generated from `Generic`, or simply `unchanged _ = (==)`). The `Cacheable (Dependency a)` instance is the only one where the `Accesses` argument is not just passed onwards. The only callsite of the `unchanged` method is in the `ArrowCache (Rule m)` method. That is to say that the `Cacheable` type class is used to decide when we can re-use parts of the schema cache between Metadata operations. So what is the `Cacheable (Dependency a)` instance about? Normally, the output of a `Rule m a b` is re-used when the new input (of type `a`) is equal to the old one. But sometimes, that's too coarse: it might be that a certain `Rule m a b` only depends on a small part of its input of type `a`. A `Dependency` allows us to spell out what parts of `a` are being depended on, and these parts are recorded as values of types `Access a` in the state `Accesses`. If the input `a` changes, but not in a way that touches the recorded `Accesses`, then the output `b` of that rule can be re-used without recomputing. So now you understand _why_ we're passing `Accesses` to the `unchanged` method: `unchanged` is an equality check in disguise that just needs some additional context. But we don't need to pass `Accesses` as a function argument. We can use the `reflection` package to pass it as type-level context. So the core of this PR is that we change the instance declaration from ```haskell instance (Cacheable a) => Cacheable (Dependency a) where ``` to ```haskell instance (Given Accesses, Eq a) => Eq (Dependency a) where ``` and use `(==)` instead of `unchanged`. If you haven't seen `reflection` before: it's like a `MonadReader`, but it doesn't require a `Monad`. In order to pass the current `Accesses` value, instead of simply passing the `Accesses` as a function argument, we need to instantiate the `Given Accesses` context. We use the `give` method from the `reflection` package for that. ```haskell give :: forall r. Accesses -> (Given Accesses => r) -> r unchanged :: (Given Accesses => Eq a) => Accesses -> a -> a -> Bool unchanged accesses a b = give accesses (a == b) ``` With these three components in place, we can delete the `Cacheable` type class entirely. The remainder of this PR is just to remove the `Cacheable` type class and its instances. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/6877 GitOrigin-RevId: 7125f5e11d856e7672ab810a23d5bf5ad176e77f	2022-11-21 16:35:37 +00:00
Vamshi Surabhi	a01d1188f2	scaffolding for remote-schemas module ... The main aim of the PR is: 1. To set up a module structure for 'remote-schemas' package. 2. Move parts by the remote schema codebase into the new module structure to validate it. ## Notes to the reviewer Why a PR with large-ish diff? 1. We've been making progress on the MM project but we don't yet know long it is going to take us to get to the first milestone. To understand this better, we need to figure out the unknowns as soon as possible. Hence I've taken a stab at the first two items in the [end-state](https://gist.github.com/0x777/ca2bdc4284d21c3eec153b51dea255c9) document to figure out the unknowns. Unsurprisingly, there are a bunch of issues that we haven't discussed earlier. These are documented in the 'open questions' section. 1. The diff is large but that is only code moved around and I've added a section that documents how things are moved. In addition, there are fair number of PR comments to help with the review process. ## Changes in the PR ### Module structure Sets up the module structure as follows: ``` Hasura/ RemoteSchema/ Metadata/ Types.hs SchemaCache/ Types.hs Permission.hs RemoteRelationship.hs Build.hs MetadataAPI/ Types.hs Execute.hs ``` ### 1. Types representing metadata are moved Types that capture metadata information (currently scattered across several RQL modules) are moved into `Hasura.RemoteSchema.Metadata.Types`. - This new module only depends on very 'core' modules such as `Hasura.Session` for the notion of roles and `Hasura.Incremental` for `Cacheable` typeclass. - The requirement on database modules is avoided by generalizing the remote schemas metadata to accept an arbitrary 'r' for a remote relationship definition. ### 2. SchemaCache related types and build logic have been moved Types that represent remote schemas information in SchemaCache are moved into `Hasura.RemoteSchema.SchemaCache.Types`. Similar to `H.RS.Metadata.Types`, this module depends on 'core' modules except for `Hasura.GraphQL.Parser.Variable`. It has something to do with remote relationships but I haven't spent time looking into it. The validation of 'remote relationships to remote schema' is also something that needs to be looked at. Rips out the logic that builds remote schema's SchemaCache information from the monolithic `buildSchemaCacheRule` and moves it into `Hasura.RemoteSchema.SchemaCache.Build`. Further, the `.SchemaCache.Permission` and `.SchemaCache.RemoteRelationship` have been created from existing modules that capture schema cache building logic for those two components. This was a fair amount of work. On main, currently remote schema's SchemaCache information is built in two phases - in the first phase, 'permissions' and 'remote relationships' are ignored and in the second phase they are filled in. While remote relationships can only be resolved after partially resolving sources and other remote schemas, the same isn't true for permissions. Further, most of the work that is done to resolve remote relationships can be moved to the first phase so that the second phase can be a very simple traversal. This is the approach that was taken - resolve permissions and as much as remote relationships information in the first phase. ### 3. Metadata APIs related types and build logic have been moved The types that represent remote schema related metadata APIs and the execution logic have been moved to `Hasura.RemoteSchema.MetadataAPI.Types` and `.Execute` modules respectively. ## Open questions: 1. `Hasura.RemoteSchema.Metadata.Types` is so called because I was hoping that all of the metadata related APIs of remote schema can be brought in at `Hasura.RemoteSchema.Metadata.API`. However, as metadata APIs depended on functions from `SchemaCache` module (see [1](ceba6d6226/server/src-lib/Hasura/RQL/DDL/RemoteSchema.hs (L55)) and [2](ceba6d6226/server/src-lib/Hasura/RQL/DDL/RemoteSchema.hs (L91)), it made more sense to create a separate top-level module for `MetadataAPI`s. Maybe we can just have `Hasura.RemoteSchema.Metadata` and get rid of the extra nesting or have `Hasura.RemoteSchema.Metadata.{Core,Permission,RemoteRelationship}` if we want to break them down further. 1. `buildRemoteSchemas` in `H.RS.SchemaCache.Build` has the following type: ```haskell buildRemoteSchemas :: ( ArrowChoice arr, Inc.ArrowDistribute arr, ArrowWriter (Seq CollectedInfo) arr, Inc.ArrowCache m arr, MonadIO m, HasHttpManagerM m, Inc.Cacheable remoteRelationshipDefinition, ToJSON remoteRelationshipDefinition, MonadError QErr m ) => Env.Environment -> ( (Inc.Dependency (HashMap RemoteSchemaName Inc.InvalidationKey), OrderedRoles), [RemoteSchemaMetadataG remoteRelationshipDefinition] ) `arr` HashMap RemoteSchemaName (PartiallyResolvedRemoteSchemaCtxG remoteRelationshipDefinition, MetadataObject) ``` Note the dependence on `CollectedInfo` which is defined as ```haskell data CollectedInfo = CIInconsistency InconsistentMetadata | CIDependency MetadataObject -- ^ for error reporting on missing dependencies SchemaObjId SchemaDependency deriving (Eq) ``` this pretty much means that remote schemas is dependent on types from databases, actions, .... How do we fix this? Maybe introduce a typeclass such as `ArrowCollectRemoteSchemaDependencies` which is defined in `Hasura.RemoteSchema` and then implemented in graphql-engine? 1. The dependency on `buildSchemaCacheFor` in `.MetadataAPI.Execute` which has the following signature: ```haskell buildSchemaCacheFor :: (QErrM m, CacheRWM m, MetadataM m) => MetadataObjId -> MetadataModifier -> ``` This can be easily resolved if we restrict what the metadata APIs are allowed to do. Currently, they operate in an unfettered access to modify SchemaCache (the `CacheRWM` constraint): ```haskell runAddRemoteSchema :: ( QErrM m, CacheRWM m, MonadIO m, HasHttpManagerM m, MetadataM m, Tracing.MonadTrace m ) => Env.Environment -> AddRemoteSchemaQuery -> m EncJSON ``` This should instead be changed to restrict remote schema APIs to only modify remote schema metadata (but has access to the remote schemas part of the schema cache), this dependency is completely removed. ```haskell runAddRemoteSchema :: ( QErrM m, MonadIO m, HasHttpManagerM m, MonadReader RemoteSchemasSchemaCache m, MonadState RemoteSchemaMetadata m, Tracing.MonadTrace m ) => Env.Environment -> AddRemoteSchemaQuery -> m RemoteSchemeMetadataObjId ``` The idea is that the core graphql-engine would call these functions and then call `buildSchemaCacheFor`. PR-URL: https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine-mono/pull/6291 GitOrigin-RevId: 51357148c6404afe70219afa71bd1d59bdf4ffc6	2022-10-21 03:15:04 +00:00