Repository navigation
Conversation
mwihoti
requested review from
dcoutts,
jorisdral and
mheinzel
as code owners
September 16, 2026 06:14
mwihoti
force-pushed
the
fix/795-tableconfig-haddock-fields
branch
from
September 16, 2026 06:26
4b6fe54 to
668bd92
Compare
jorisdral
requested changes
Sep 21, 2026
jorisdral
left a comment
jorisdral
left a comment
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changes look good to me! I have a few small requests and then we can merge this
| -- batches improves overall performance but some updates will take a lot | ||
| -- longer than others. The default is to use a large batch size. | ||
| , confMergeBatchSize :: !MergeBatchSize | ||
| } |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I'd prefer the previous version, where the documentation was on TableConfig. So let's rewind that
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll revert to the previous version
Comment on lines
+41
to
+44
| * The record fields of `TableConfig` are now rendered in the haddocks, with | ||
| their types and documentation. See [issue | ||
| #795](https://github.com/IntersectMBO/lsm-tree/issues/795) and [PR | ||
| #885](https://github.com/IntersectMBO/lsm-tree/pull/885). |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is a breaking change, since we're exporting the fields no longer as part of TableConfig, but as separate entities in the export list
Comment on lines
129
to
+128
| defaultTableConfig, | ||
| confMergePolicy, | ||
| confMergeSchedule, | ||
| confSizeRatio, | ||
| confWriteBufferAlloc, | ||
| confBloomFilterAlloc, | ||
| confFencePointerIndex, | ||
| confDiskCachePolicy, | ||
| confMergeBatchSize, |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did you deliberately sort them a different way? Let's keep the order as it was
Suggested change
| defaultTableConfig, | |
| confMergePolicy, | |
| confMergeSchedule, | |
| confSizeRatio, | |
| confWriteBufferAlloc, | |
| confBloomFilterAlloc, | |
| confFencePointerIndex, | |
| confDiskCachePolicy, | |
| confMergeBatchSize, | |
| confMergePolicy, | |
| confSizeRatio, | |
| confWriteBufferAlloc, | |
| confBloomFilterAlloc, | |
| confFencePointerIndex, | |
| confDiskCachePolicy, | |
| confMergeSchedule, | |
| confMergeBatchSize, | |
| defaultTableConfig, |
Comment on lines
+100
to
+106
| confMergePolicy, | ||
| confMergeSchedule, | ||
| confSizeRatio, | ||
| confWriteBufferAlloc, | ||
| confBloomFilterAlloc, | ||
| confFencePointerIndex, | ||
| confDiskCachePolicy, |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did you deliberately sort them a different way? Let's keep the order as it was
Suggested change
| confMergePolicy, | |
| confMergeSchedule, | |
| confSizeRatio, | |
| confWriteBufferAlloc, | |
| confBloomFilterAlloc, | |
| confFencePointerIndex, | |
| confDiskCachePolicy, | |
| confMergePolicy, | |
| confSizeRatio, | |
| confWriteBufferAlloc, | |
| confBloomFilterAlloc, | |
| confFencePointerIndex, | |
| confDiskCachePolicy, | |
| confMergeSchedule |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have maintained the way the order was
mwihoti
force-pushed
the
fix/795-tableconfig-haddock-fields
branch
from
September 24, 2026 07:01
668bd92 to
e6c390d
Compare
The fields were missing from the docs because Haddock only shows record fields when the constructor is exported, and we keep TableConfig's constructor hidden on purpose so that adding a field later isn't a breaking change (that's why the (..) approach in IntersectMBO#816 didn't fly). So instead of listing the fields inside the TableConfig export, I export the selectors as plain functions from Database.LSMTree and Database.LSMTree.Simple. The constructor is still hidden, but now each field shows up with its type. The field docs stay on TableConfig. Resolves IntersectMBO#795.
mwihoti
force-pushed
the
fix/795-tableconfig-haddock-fields
branch
from
September 29, 2026 17:48
e6c390d to
c891c5f
Compare
This branch has not been deployed
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Resolves #795.
The
TableConfigfields were missing from the docs because Haddock only shows record fields when the constructor is exported, and we keep the constructor hidden on purpose so that adding a field later isn't a breaking change which is why the(..)approach in #816 didn't fly.So instead of listing the fields inside the
TableConfigexport, this exports the selectors as plain functions fromDatabase.LSMTreeandDatabase.LSMTree.Simple. The constructor is still hidden, but each field now shows up in haddocks with its type. The field documentation stays onTableConfig, as before.Before(Hackage, 1.1.1.0): https://hackage-content.haskell.org/package/lsm-tree-1.1.1.0/docs/Database-LSMTree.html#t:TableConfig — the type doc only, no fields.
I also checked
blockioandbloomfilterfor the same export pattern, as asked in the issue —TableConfigwas the only one.Checklist