aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/docs/join-strategies.md
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'docs/join-strategies.md')
-rw-r--r--docs/join-strategies.md305
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 305 deletions
diff --git a/docs/join-strategies.md b/docs/join-strategies.md
deleted file mode 100644
index 049aad7..0000000
--- a/docs/join-strategies.md
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,305 +0,0 @@
-# Join Strategies in the Tarski FOL Runtime
-
-This document covers the join operators available or planned for the Tarski
-Volcano engine, their memory and I/O characteristics, and the role that backend
-indexes play in making large-relation joins practical.
-
----
-
-## Current implementation: nested-loop join
-
-The current `JOIN` node is a classic nested-loop join.
-
-```
-for each outer (left) tuple L:
- reset inner (right) cursor to offset 0
- for each inner tuple R:
- if join condition holds: emit merge(L, R)
-```
-
-**Memory**: O(1). The left cursor holds one page (one tuple at `PAGE_SIZE = 1`).
-The right cursor also holds one page at a time; `ResetInner` clears the page and
-resets `fetch_offset` to 0 so the backend re-reads from the start for each outer
-tuple. Neither side is ever materialized in full.
-
-**I/O**: O(n × m) backend reads. The right relation is scanned once per outer
-tuple, so a billion-row right side costs a billion backend reads per outer tuple.
-
-**Best case**: ephemeral relations (builtins like `eq`, `lt`, etc.) on the right
-side. These run the generator function in O(1) with no backend I/O. The join
-degenerates into a streamed filter.
-
-**Worst case**: two large stored relations with no index. Acceptable only when
-one side is small, or when the right side fits in the OS page cache.
-
----
-
-## Index nested-loop join
-
-The most practical improvement. If Sakura exposes a B+ tree index on the join
-attribute of the right relation, the inner loop becomes a point lookup instead
-of a full scan.
-
-```
-for each outer tuple L:
- key = L[join_attr]
- R = backend.Lookup(right_relation, join_attr, key) // O(log m)
- if R exists: emit merge(L, R)
-```
-
-**Memory**: O(1). Same as nested-loop — no buffering on either side.
-
-**I/O**: O(n log m). Each outer tuple triggers one B+ tree traversal on the right.
-
-**Backend requirement**: `IStorageBackend` would need a new method:
-
-```cpp
-virtual std::vector<std::string> TupleHashesByKey(
- const std::vector<std::string>& relation_path,
- const std::string& attribute,
- const std::string& value,
- std::size_t offset,
- std::size_t limit) = 0;
-```
-
-Sakura already maintains a per-relation B+ tree of tuple hashes. An additional
-B+ tree keyed by attribute value is the natural extension and mirrors how most
-production storage engines implement secondary indexes.
-
-This is the correct long-term default join strategy for stored × stored joins.
-
----
-
-## Sort-merge join
-
-Both inputs are scanned once in sorted order, advancing a cursor on each side
-in lock-step.
-
-```
-L = Next(left)
-R = Next(right)
-while L and R:
- if L[key] == R[key]: emit merge(L, R); advance both
- if L[key] < R[key]: L = Next(left)
- if L[key] > R[key]: R = Next(right)
-```
-
-**Memory**: O(1) if both inputs arrive pre-sorted. The Volcano model handles
-page boundaries transparently — each `Next()` call fetches the next page from
-the backend when the current page is exhausted, independent of the other cursor.
-There is no synchronization problem at the page level; the operator logic only
-ever holds two tuples at a time.
-
-**I/O**: O(n + m). Each relation is scanned exactly once.
-
-**Requirement**: both inputs must be sorted on the join attribute before the
-merge step. This means either:
-- The backend returns tuples in sorted attribute order (sorted scan support), or
-- A `SORT` operator precedes each input in the plan tree.
-
-Sorting an unsorted relation requires O(n log n) time and — unless done via an
-external merge sort that stays within a fixed memory budget — O(n) memory.
-Sakura's B+ tree already imposes an ordering on stored tuple hashes; whether
-that ordering corresponds to an attribute value ordering depends on the index
-structure.
-
----
-
-## Hash join
-
-Build a hash table from the smaller relation, probe with the larger.
-
-```
-phase 1 — build: for each R: insert R into hash_table[R[key]]
-phase 2 — probe: for each L: for each match in hash_table[L[key]]: emit merge(L, R)
-```
-
-**Memory**: O(min(n, m)). The build side must fit entirely in memory. Fails
-under memory pressure for large relations.
-
-**I/O**: O(n + m) — each relation scanned once.
-
-This is the right choice when the build side is small and fits in RAM. Not
-suitable as a general-purpose operator in a constant-memory runtime.
-
----
-
-## Grace hash join (partitioned hash join)
-
-An extension of hash join that handles larger-than-memory relations by
-partitioning both sides into buckets that individually fit in memory.
-
-```
-phase 1 — partition: hash each side into k buckets written to temporary storage
-phase 2 — join: for each bucket pair (left_i, right_i): in-memory hash join
-```
-
-**Memory**: O(√(n + m)) with optimal bucket count. Bounded but not O(1).
-
-**I/O**: O(3(n + m)) — three full passes over the data.
-
-Requires a writable temporary storage area (spill buffer). Relevant only if
-memory pressure prevents a standard hash join and sort-merge is not available.
-Not planned for the near term.
-
----
-
-## Symmetric hash join
-
-Builds hash tables for both sides simultaneously as tuples arrive from either
-input. Suitable for streaming or pipelined inputs where one side may block
-before producing all its tuples.
-
-**Memory**: O(n + m) in the worst case — both hash tables may grow to full size.
-
-Not planned. Mentioned because Sakura streams tuples lazily; if the OCaml side
-ever introduces back-pressure on one relation while the other produces freely,
-symmetric hashing becomes relevant.
-
----
-
-## LeapFrog TrieJoin
-
-LeapFrog TrieJoin (Veldhuizen, 2012) is the state of the art for multi-way
-joins in logic programming and Datalog engines. It is **worst-case optimal**:
-it runs in time proportional to the AGM bound — the tight theoretical upper
-bound on the output size of a conjunctive query given the sizes of its input
-relations. Traditional pairwise binary joins applied sequentially can produce
-intermediate results that exceed this bound, making them suboptimal for cyclic
-or highly connected queries.
-
-### How it works
-
-Rather than joining two relations at a time, LeapFrog TrieJoin joins all
-relations in a query **simultaneously**. Each relation is represented as a
-trie — a sorted, prefix-keyed index over its attribute values. One cursor per
-relation is maintained, all pointing into their respective tries at the same
-attribute depth.
-
-The algorithm iterates over one shared variable at a time. At each step:
-
-1. Find the relation whose cursor currently points to the **maximum** value
- among all cursors.
-2. **Seek** all other cursors forward to that maximum (or the next value ≥ it).
-3. If all cursors agree on the same value: emit the binding and descend to the
- next variable.
-4. If a cursor cannot find a value ≥ the maximum: backtrack and advance the
- previous variable.
-
-The seek operation is what makes this efficient. Instead of scanning linearly
-through values that cannot match, a cursor jumps directly to the next candidate
-using the sorted order of the trie. No intermediate results are materialized.
-
-**Memory**: O(k) where k is the number of relations — one cursor per relation,
-plus one tuple per active binding level. Constant with respect to relation size.
-
-**I/O**: O(n^τ\*) where τ\* is the fractional edge cover of the query
-hypergraph. For acyclic joins this matches the Yannakakis bound; for cyclic
-joins it beats any binary join plan.
-
-### Why this fits the Tarski/Karuta model
-
-Karuta is WAM-based. The WAM already operates on term tries during unification,
-advancing through sorted clause indexes when resolving goals. LeapFrog TrieJoin
-is the relational analogue: the trie structure and the seek-based iteration
-pattern are the same. When Sakura emits a plan to Tarski, the multi-way join
-over several relations maps directly onto a LeapFrog node whose cursors are
-driven by the same pull model as every other Volcano operator.
-
-### Current state of Sakura
-
-Reading `lib/algebra.ml`, the current join implementation materializes the
-entire right-hand relation into memory before beginning the left-hand scan:
-
-```ocaml
-let right_tuples = drain right_gen in (* ← full materialization *)
-List.filter_map (fun rt -> ...) right_tuples (* ← linear scan per left tuple *)
-```
-
-This is a documented TODO in the codebase. Beyond the memory cost, it is a
-strictly binary join — three or more relations require multiple sequential
-passes with growing intermediate materialization.
-
-The generator type (`int option -> result`) is forward-only and position-counted.
-It has no seek primitive: you cannot ask a generator to jump to the next value
-≥ a target without scanning every value in between.
-
-Sakura does have a B+ tree binding (`lib/bplustree.ml`, FFI to a C library) but
-it is currently wired only to the KV storage layer for tuple hash persistence,
-not to any per-attribute ordered index.
-
-### What would need to change in Sakura
-
-**1. Per-attribute sorted indexes**
-
-Each stored relation needs a secondary index mapping attribute values to tuple
-hashes, maintained in sorted order. The existing B+ tree binding is the natural
-substrate for this — it already supports ordered key storage and would expose
-range traversal and seek as cursor operations.
-
-The index structure per relation would be:
-
-```
-relation_path / attribute_name → B+ tree of (value, tuple_hash_set)
-```
-
-**2. A seek-capable cursor type**
-
-The generator type needs to be extended (or complemented) with a cursor
-abstraction that supports:
-
-- `current()` — the value at the current position
-- `seek(target)` — advance to the first value ≥ target; return whether one exists
-- `next()` — advance by one step
-
-A generator that only supports `next()` cannot implement LeapFrog without
-scanning every skipped value. The seek operation is the essential primitive.
-
-**3. A multi-way join operator in `algebra.ml`**
-
-The current `equijoin` function is binary. LeapFrog TrieJoin takes an arbitrary
-list of relations and a variable ordering. A new `leapfrog_join` function would
-replace the sequential application of `equijoin` for multi-relation conjunctive
-queries.
-
-### What would need to change in Tarski (this codebase)
-
-On the C++ side, the `CursorManager` would need a `Seek` operation alongside
-`Next`:
-
-```cpp
-/** Advances the cursor to the first tuple whose join-attribute value is ≥ target.
- * Returns nullptr if no such tuple exists (relation exhausted). */
-Tuple* Seek(cursor* c, const std::string& attribute, const std::string& target);
-```
-
-The plan tree would gain a `LEAPFROG` node holding N child SCAN cursors and a
-variable ordering list. `VM::Next` on a `LEAPFROG` node drives the seek loop
-across all cursors rather than delegating to nested-loop iteration.
-
----
-
-## Summary
-
-| Strategy | Memory | I/O | Requires |
-|---|---|---|---|
-| Nested-loop (current) | O(1) | O(n × m) | Nothing |
-| Index nested-loop | O(1) | O(n log m) | Per-attribute B+ tree index |
-| Sort-merge | O(1)* | O(n + m) | Pre-sorted inputs |
-| Hash join | O(min(n,m)) | O(n + m) | Build side fits in RAM |
-| Grace hash join | O(√(n+m)) | O(3(n+m)) | Spill storage |
-| LeapFrog TrieJoin | O(k) | O(n^τ\*) | Seek-capable trie cursors |
-
-\* O(1) only if both inputs arrive sorted. Sorting in-place requires O(n) memory.
-
-The practical roadmap for this runtime:
-
-1. **Now**: nested-loop covers all ephemeral-relation joins in O(1) memory.
-2. **Next**: index nested-loop once Sakura exposes per-attribute B+ tree reads —
- covers the large stored × stored binary join case without buffering.
-3. **Target**: LeapFrog TrieJoin once Sakura adds seek-capable cursors and
- per-attribute sorted indexes. This replaces both index nested-loop and
- sort-merge for multi-relation conjunctive queries and is the correct
- long-term join primitive for a Datalog/WAM-oriented engine.
-4. **Only if needed**: hash join with an explicit memory budget, for ad-hoc
- joins where no usable index exists.