Add `flatten` attribute to derive SerializeRow #1144

nrxus · 2024-12-07T09:32:59Z

This is similar to the flatten attribute in serde.

This PR adds support for both the match_by_name and the enforce_ordering flavors but it does not allow these structs to be mix-and-matched. This means that structs of different flavors of serialization cannot be flattened into one another. This is a feasibility limitation as these two methods of serialization are completely at odds with each other and hence cannot be combined. The error produced if these two flavors are matched will be at compile time but it may not be the clearest error since it would be about the struct not implementing some doc hidden trait they wouldn't be able to see in the docs.

I have only added this attribute to SerializeRow because it was easier than DeserializeRow but I also want to add it to that macro in a future PR next chance I get to dig into this code.

All the new traits/structs/enums needed for this change are inside the _macro_internal subdmodule such that no new public API is exposed. Maybe in the future those could be made public but it felt too early to know if all the signatures were exactly how we wanted to expose them or not.

For context, I am currently dealing with an issue that if I have different insert queries where one sets N columns and another one sets the same N and one extra, then I have two make two structs with N repeated fields. With this PR I'd be able to to instead flatten the struct with N fields inside the other struct to make my code more maintainable.

By name serialization

`ser::row::ByName`

A new internal-only struct ser::row::ByName is added that wraps a struct that implements a new trait: SerializeRowByName. This new type has a single function ser::row::ByName::serialize and attempts to serialize an entire RowSerializationContext, returning an error if any of the columns in the context were not serialized or do not belong to the struct. This is basically the implementation of SerializeRow::serialize for any struct that implements SerializeRowByName but split into its own internal-type so that the macro doesn't have to create this shared code. This couldn't be added as a default implementation in one of our traits because we need to call for some functions using Self as a generic parameter which caused some compilation errors.

`SerializeRowByName`

When deriving SerializeRow using the match_by_name flavor the struct will also implement a new internal-only trait: SerializeRowByName. This trait has a single type associated type Partial, and a function partial() that creates it. The partial struct has 3 main parts:

For every field that is a column (will not be flattened): A reference to the field.
For every field that is a nested struct (will be flattened) The partial view of that nested struct. This means that the nested struct must also implement: SerializeRowByName such that partial() can be called on it.
A hashset to check that every field (not column) has been serialized. For fields that are columns we do this via their column-name. For nested structs, we do this via the field name of the nested struct.

The partial struct is required to implement a new trait PartialSerializeRowByName

`PartialSerializeRowByName`

PartialSerializeRowByName has two required functions:

serialize_field: takes the spec of a single column and attempts to serialize the corresponding field to it. If this column does not belong to this partial struct then the caller is told that the column is unused so that the caller can instead try to use a different field for this same column (i.e., when testing to see if any nested structs can serialize to that column). If the column is used, then a check is done to see if that column has completed the serialization of this field so that it can remove it out of its missing set. The caller is informed if that column has finished the serialization of this partial struct or not.
check_missing: consumes the partial struct while checking if all the fields in this struct were serialized, returning an error if not. This is used inside ser::row::ByName::serialize to verify that the a struct has been fully serialized. If a field has not finished serializing and the field is a nested struct (i.e., not just a column) then we should get the error from the nested struct instead for better error messaging.

To do this signaling, a new internal-only enum ser::row::FieldStatus was added that returns whether a column was used for the field, was used and completed the field, or was used by the field is still missing more columns.

By order serialization

`ser::row::InOrder`

A new internal-only struct ser::row::InOrder is added that wraps a struct that implements a new trait: SerializeRowInOrder. This new type has a single function ser::row::InOrder::serialize that attempts to serialize an entire RowSerializationContext, returning an error if any of the columns in the context were not serialized or do not belong to the struct. It does this by:

Wrapping an iterator over the columns in the context around a new struct ser::row::ByColumn.
Calling for the generated SerializeRowInOrder implementation for the struct we are deriving SerializeRow for using the ser::row::ByColumn instance.
Verifying that the the ser::row::ByColumn instance was fully consumed.

This is basically the implementation of SerializeRow::serialize for any struct that implements SerializeRowInOrder but split into its own internal-type so that the macro doesn't have to create this shared code. This couldn't be added as a default implementation in one of our traits because we need to call for some functions using Self as a generic parameter which caused some compilation errors.

`ser::row::ByColumn`

ser::row::ByColumn wraps an iterator over column specs and provides the following methods:

next: Given a value to serialize it type and name checks it against the next column spec in the iterator, serializing it if successful or returning an error therwise
next_skip_name: Given a value to serialize it type checks (but skips name check) it against the next column spec in the iterator, serializing it if successful or returning an error therwise
finish: verifies that the iterator is fully consumed.

`SerializeRowInOrder`

When deriving SerializeRow using the enforced_ordering flavor the struct will also implement a new internal-only trait: SerializeRowInOrder. This trait has a single method serialize_in_order() whose generated implementation will:

For every field that is a column (will not be flattened): It will call for for next or next_skip_name on the given ser::row::ByColum instance.
For every field that is a nested struct (will be flattened), then it will call for serialize_in_order on it (implying the nested struct must also implement SerializeRowInOrder and pass along its ser::row::ByColum instance.

Note that this method does not call for finish() on ser::row::ByColumn because it does not need to verify that the iterator was fully consumed as it could have been called during flattening and we only want to verify that the iterator is consumed on the root struct being serialized.

Pre-review checklist

I have split my patch into logically separate commits.
All commit messages clearly explain what they change and why.
I added relevant tests for new features and bug fixes.
All commits compile, pass static checks and pass test.
PR description sums up the changes and reasons why they should be introduced.
I have provided docstrings for the public items that I want to introduce.

github-actions · 2024-12-07T09:38:27Z

cargo semver-checks found no API-breaking changes in this PR.
Checked commit: c5470a0

nrxus · 2024-12-09T18:21:55Z

I apologize about the multiple force pushes yesterday, I was chewing on it yesterday a bit more since it wasn't reviewed yet and decided to move some stuff around to make it more clear that all the new structs are internal to the macro implementation only (by moving it to that sub-module). All that should be done by now.

I have also started work on adding the flatten attribute for the enforce_order flavor as well but in a separate branch. Let me know if you have a preference on whether to put that as its own PR or push it here so that the entire support for #[flatten] for SerializeRow is all on in one PR.

nrxus · 2024-12-10T21:40:05Z

I have finished the work to also support flattening when serializing with flavor = "enforced_order". It's on a separate branch though since I wasn't sure if this PR was already considered too big or not. Let me know if you'd like me to merge it into here so you can review it all as one piece or if I should just wait until this is reviewed and merged as the changes are already large.

nrxus · 2024-12-12T02:53:36Z

@wprzytula would you mind taking a look at this PR and tell me if you would like me to keep it as-is or add the flatten support to the enforced_order flavor as well in this PR?

nrxus · 2024-12-17T21:07:11Z

@Lorak-mmk , could you take a look and let me know if there are any concerns holding this PR?

wprzytula · 2024-12-18T17:36:47Z

@nrxus We're sorry for poor responsivity on our side. We're busy with next year planning; we'll be able to look at your PR later.

Lorak-mmk · 2024-12-18T18:27:42Z

This is a significant but breaking change, so we most likely won't be able to attend to it before releasing 1.0. We are quite busy with other work :(

wprzytula · 2024-12-18T20:02:05Z

This is a significant but breaking change, so we most likely won't be able to attend to it before releasing 1.0. We are quite busy with other work :(

Are you sure? semver-checks disagrees with you:

cargo semver-checks found no API-breaking changes in this PR! 🎉🥳 Checked commit: 4184a7b

nrxus · 2024-12-18T20:07:10Z

I made especially sure not to change any existing API, and to hide all of the new types/traits in the existing internal module to not increase the public API surface area other the new attribute.

wprzytula · 2024-12-18T20:10:27Z

I made especially sure not to change any existing API, and to hide all of the new types/traits in the existing internal module to not increase the public API surface area other the new attribute.

In such case, we will technically be able to release it in, say, 1.1, when we find time to review and accept this after we release 1.0. Does it sound OK to you, @nrxus ?

nrxus · 2024-12-18T20:15:26Z

I made especially sure not to change any existing API, and to hide all of the new types/traits in the existing internal module to not increase the public API surface area other the new attribute.

In such case, we will technically be able to release it in, say, 1.1, when we find time to review and accept this after we release 1.0. Does it sound OK to you, @nrxus ?

Yep sounds good! I'll just keep pointing to my branch for now. I also have a branch to do this same support but when serializing with order enforced. Should I just merge it here so you all only have to review it as one complete feature? It'd make the overall size of the PR bigger which is why I had kept it separate

wprzytula · 2024-12-18T20:23:50Z

I made especially sure not to change any existing API, and to hide all of the new types/traits in the existing internal module to not increase the public API surface area other the new attribute.

In such case, we will technically be able to release it in, say, 1.1, when we find time to review and accept this after we release 1.0. Does it sound OK to you, @nrxus ?

Yep sounds good! I'll just keep pointing to my branch for now. I also have a branch to do this same support but when serializing with order enforced. Should I just merge it here so you all only have to review it as one complete feature? It'd make the overall size of the PR bigger which is why I had kept it separate

IMO let's have it in a single PR, separate commits.

Lorak-mmk · 2024-12-18T20:27:42Z

This is a significant but breaking change, so we most likely won't be able to attend to it before releasing 1.0. We are quite busy with other work :(

Are you sure? semver-checks disagrees with you:

cargo semver-checks found no API-breaking changes in this PR! 🎉🥳 Checked commit: 4184a7b

I made a typo. I definitely meant that this is NOT a breaking change, and thus we will not prioritise the review before releasing 1.0.

nrxus · 2025-04-08T21:25:46Z

I took a stab at writing those messages, but I see you were faster. My commits are available at: https://github.com/Lorak-mmk/scylla-rust-driver/tree/flatten-serialize-name I'm not sure which messages are better, mine or yours. I'll let you and others (cc @wprzytula @muzarski ) decide.

I am perfectly happy with your version so I just did that but I removed the do_not_recommend diagnostic attributes because those were only introduced in 1.85 and I think you all have a 6-month MSRV cycle so that'd be too recent.

Also, you were right, once I switched to fully qualifying the path then there is only one error for the first case as expected:

error[E0277]: `serialize::row::tests::foobar::Inner` cannot be flattened here
    --> scylla-cql/src/serialize/row_tests.rs:1220:14
     |
1220 |     #[derive(SerializeRow)]
     |              ^^^^^^^^^^^^ `serialize::row::tests::foobar::Inner` is not a struct that derives `SerializeRow` with `match_by_name` flavor
     |
     = help: the trait `SerializeRowByName` is not implemented for `serialize::row::tests::foobar::Inner`
     = note: There are two common reasons for that:
             - `serialize::row::tests::foobar::Inner` does not use `#[derive(SerializeRow)]`
             - `serialize::row::tests::foobar::Inner` uses `#[scylla(flavor = "enforce_order")]`
     = help: the following other types implement trait `SerializeRowByName`:
               RowWithTTL
               TestRowWithColumnRename
               TestRowWithColumnSorting
               TestRowWithGenerics<'a, T>
               TestRowWithNoColumns
               TestRowWithSkippedFields
               serialize::row::tests::foobar::Outer
               serialize::row::tests::test_row_serialization_nested_structs::InnerColumnsOne
             and 2 others
     = note: this error originates in the derive macro `SerializeRow` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)

For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0277`.
error: could not compile `scylla-cql` (lib test) due to 4 previous errors

Lorak-mmk

Last 2 minor changes.

Lorak-mmk · 2025-04-09T09:33:40Z

scylla-macros/src/serialize/row.rs

+                    // if not, then check if any flattened field has a column for it
+                    _ => 'flatten_try: {
+                        #({
+                            match self.#flattened_fields.serialize_field(spec, writer)? {
+                                // there is a column and the field is done


Ugh, I reall thought I would give approve this time, but there is one more unqualified call :(

Lorak-mmk · 2025-04-09T09:34:07Z

scylla-macros/src/serialize/row.rs

+                    // if what is missing is a flattened field then report that error
+                    #(if !self.#flattened_visited_flag_names {
+                        return self.#flattened_fields.check_missing()
+                    })*
+


And another one here

This test checks that `DeserializeValue` macro behaves correctly in case of https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/4a80daf32eb4226d9870b914779a1fc007479da6/doc/native_protocol_v4.spec#L1003. 1. Serialize the UDT with the missing field value 2. Deserialize the serialized UDT, but include the missing field in metadata 3. Expect that the missing field value is treated as null I don't know of any way to simulate this using the Scylla/C* cluster. CQL protocol mentions that such scenario is possible, but does not specify when it can appear.

the function itself is technically public but in the doc hidden internal macro module so that it can be used for macros to simplify code expansion but doesn't affect the surface area of the public API

otherwise it can't compile if the impl block already had a 'b named lifetime

`NoColumnWithName` and `ValueMissingForColumn` were flipped. `NoColumnWithName` is returned when there is a serializable field in the Rust struct (i.e., is it not ignored) but there is no matching column for it in the spec `ValueMissingForColumn` should be returned when the spec expects a column but there is no matching field in the Rust struct.

Lorak-mmk · 2025-04-09T09:57:51Z

I see at least one other unqualified call. Give me a moment, I'll fix them and push to my branch.

This is a no-op refactor to the code generation by SerializeRow. New types and traits are introduced in the doc hidden module `_macro_internal` such that the API surface area is unchanged. The goal of this refactor is to make the addition of the flattened serialization feature easier

any helper types/methods have been created inside the internal macro module so as not to increase the public API surface area

This commit focuses on the `match_by_name` flavor.

If a struct's field is a reference, allow that reference to use the `flatten` attribute so that the field can be serialized using SerializeRow and the columns produced flattened into the parent struct. Prior to this commit this was not possible so this commit does two changes: 1. Adds a blanket implementation on the needed traits (SerializeRowByName and SerializeRowInOrder) for references of structs that already implement them. 2. Adds a bound to the lifetimes of the fields when making the partial structs during serialization such that the reference to the fields have to outlive the partial struct being created during serialization.

It was released over 6 months ago so it is ok to use it. It allows us to use LazyCell.

This uses `diagnostic::on_unimplemented` to hint the users to derive `SerializeRow` with the correct flavor

Lorak-mmk · 2025-04-09T10:35:25Z

I've pushed some changes to my branch ( https://github.com/Lorak-mmk/scylla-rust-driver/tree/flatten-serialize-name ), feel free to use it.

Got rid of unqualified calls
Moved one formatting change to a different commit. Without that make static is not passing on one commit.

I have no more issues with this version, so if you decide to use it I can approve without another review.

nrxus · 2025-04-09T16:36:38Z

I have rebased my branch against yours such that this PR now has your changes. Let me know if that's enough.

Lorak-mmk

Really great work! I hope you don't hate us too much for that many review rounds 😅
I don't think we need to wait for @wprzytula - he approved it many times already.

nrxus · 2025-04-09T18:40:15Z

Thanks for the approval and merge! No worries about the many rounds, it was a big change so I appreciate thoroughness!

wprzytula requested review from Lorak-mmk, muzarski and wprzytula December 7, 2024 09:43

nrxus force-pushed the flatten-serialize-name branch 8 times, most recently from 0de5bb0 to dc2a19e Compare December 9, 2024 04:25

nrxus force-pushed the flatten-serialize-name branch from c03bf5b to 4184a7b Compare December 13, 2024 17:18

nrxus force-pushed the flatten-serialize-name branch 5 times, most recently from 236ab1a to 031f226 Compare December 24, 2024 19:53

nrxus force-pushed the flatten-serialize-name branch from 1af115e to ea09107 Compare April 8, 2025 21:27

wprzytula previously approved these changes Apr 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

Lorak-mmk requested changes Apr 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

muzarski and others added 5 commits April 9, 2025 11:43

move _macro_internal to its own external module instead of inlined

8873289

extract how to serialize a single column to an internal function

8dbdb45

the function itself is technically public but in the doc hidden internal macro module so that it can be used for macros to simplify code expansion but doesn't affect the surface area of the public API

make the named lifetime of serialize more unique

ddc2a8d

otherwise it can't compile if the impl block already had a 'b named lifetime

nrxus and others added 8 commits April 9, 2025 12:13

refactor deriving SerializeRow when serializing in order

5ae2ebf

any helper types/methods have been created inside the internal macro module so as not to increase the public API surface area

Add #[scylla(flatten)] attribute when deriving SerializeRow

4aea65e

This commit focuses on the `match_by_name` flavor.

support #[scylla(flatten)] when deriving SerializeRow in order

1b05cf7

renamed ty->typ in SerializeValue macro

0d9df11

Bump MSRV to 1.80

78d2de6

It was released over 6 months ago so it is ok to use it. It allows us to use LazyCell.

improved compile-time error when fields cannot be flattened

c5470a0

This uses `diagnostic::on_unimplemented` to hint the users to derive `SerializeRow` with the correct flavor

nrxus dismissed wprzytula’s stale review via c5470a0 April 9, 2025 16:36

nrxus force-pushed the flatten-serialize-name branch from ea09107 to c5470a0 Compare April 9, 2025 16:36

nrxus requested review from Lorak-mmk and wprzytula April 9, 2025 16:36

Lorak-mmk approved these changes Apr 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

Lorak-mmk added this to the 1.2.0 milestone Apr 9, 2025

Lorak-mmk merged commit dea72ee into scylladb:main Apr 9, 2025
12 checks passed

wprzytula mentioned this pull request Apr 12, 2025

Adjust to MSRV 1.80 #1319

Merged

4 tasks

wprzytula mentioned this pull request May 26, 2025

Release 1.2.0 #1360

Merged

Add flatten attribute to derive SerializeRow #1144

Add flatten attribute to derive SerializeRow #1144

Uh oh!

Conversation

nrxus commented Dec 7, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

By name serialization

ser::row::ByName

SerializeRowByName

PartialSerializeRowByName

By order serialization

ser::row::InOrder

ser::row::ByColumn

SerializeRowInOrder

Pre-review checklist

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Dec 7, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

nrxus commented Dec 9, 2024

Uh oh!

nrxus commented Dec 10, 2024

Uh oh!

nrxus commented Dec 12, 2024

Uh oh!

nrxus commented Dec 17, 2024

Uh oh!

wprzytula commented Dec 18, 2024

Uh oh!

Lorak-mmk commented Dec 18, 2024

Uh oh!

wprzytula commented Dec 18, 2024

Uh oh!

nrxus commented Dec 18, 2024

Uh oh!

wprzytula commented Dec 18, 2024

Uh oh!

nrxus commented Dec 18, 2024

Uh oh!

wprzytula commented Dec 18, 2024

Uh oh!

Lorak-mmk commented Dec 18, 2024

Uh oh!

nrxus commented Apr 8, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Lorak-mmk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Lorak-mmk Apr 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Lorak-mmk Apr 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Lorak-mmk commented Apr 9, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Lorak-mmk commented Apr 9, 2025

Uh oh!

nrxus commented Apr 9, 2025

Uh oh!

Lorak-mmk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

nrxus commented Apr 9, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Add `flatten` attribute to derive SerializeRow #1144

Add `flatten` attribute to derive SerializeRow #1144

nrxus commented Dec 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

`ser::row::ByName`

`SerializeRowByName`

`PartialSerializeRowByName`

`ser::row::InOrder`

`ser::row::ByColumn`

`SerializeRowInOrder`

github-actions bot commented Dec 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

nrxus commented Apr 8, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Lorak-mmk commented Apr 9, 2025 •

edited

Loading