Merge pull request #14288 from MinaProtocol/rfc/hard-fork-data-migration

[RFC] Hard fork data migration

rfcs/0052-hard-fork-data-migration.md

@@ -0,0 +1,142 @@
+## Summary
+[summary]: #summary
+
+This document describes a strategy for migrating mainnet archive data
+to a new archive data for use at the hard fork.
+
+## Motivation
+[motivation]: #motivation
+
+We wish to have archive data available from mainnet, so that the
+archive database at the hard fork contains a complete history of
+blocks and transactions.
+
+## Detailed design
+[detailed-design]: #detailed-design
+
+There are significant differences between the mainnet and proposed
+hard fork database schemas. Most notably, the `balances` table in the
+mainnet schema no longer exists, and is replaced in the new schema
+with the table `accounts_accessed`. The data in `accounts_accessed`
+cannot be determined statically from the mainnet data.  There is also
+a new table `accounts_created`, which might be determinable statically
+The new schema also has the columns `min_window_density` and
+`sub_window_densities` in the `blocks` table; those columns do not
+exist in the `blocks` table for mainnet.
+
+To populate the new database, there can be two applications:
+
+- The first application migrates as much data as possible from the
+mainnet database, and downloads precomputed blocks to get the window
+density data. The `accounts_accessed` and `accounts_created` tables
+are not populated in this step. This application runs against
+the mainnet and the new database.
+
+- The second application, based on the replayer app, replays the
+transactions in the partially-migrated database, and populates the
+`accounts_accessed` and `accounts_created` tables. This application
+also performs the checks performed by the standard replayer, except
+that ledger hashes are not checked, because the hard fork ledger has
+greater depth, which results in different hashes. This application
+runs only against the new database.
+
+These applications can be run in sequence to get a fully-migrated
+database. They should be able to work incrementally, so that part of
+the mainnet database can be migrated and, as new blocks are added on
+mainnet, the new data in the database can be migrated.
+
+To obtain that incrementality, the first application can look at the
+migrated database, and determine the most recent migrated block. It
+can continue migrating starting at the next block in the mainnet
+data. The second application can use the checkpointing mechanism
+already in place for the replayer. A checkpoint file indicates the
+global slot since genesis for starting the replay, and the ledger to
+use for that replay. The application writes new checkpoint files as it
+proceeds.
+
+To take advantage of such incrementality, there can be a cron job
+that migrates a day's worth of data at a time (or some other interval).
+With the cron job in place, at the time of the actual hard fork, only a small
+amount of data will need to be migrated.
+
+The cron job will need Google Cloud buckets (or other storage):
+
+ - a bucket to store migrated-so-far database dumps
+ - a bucket to store checkpoint files
+
+To prime the cron job, upload an initial database dump, and an
+initial checkpoint file. Those can be created via these steps,
+run locally:
+ - download a mainnet archive dump, and loading it into PostgreSQL
+ - create a new, empty database using the new archive schema
+ - run the first migration app against the mainnet and new databases
+ - run the second migration app with the `--checkpoint-interval` set
+    to some suitable value (perhaps 100), and starting with the
+	original mainnet ledger in the input file
+ - use `pg_dump` to dump the migrated database, upload it
+ - upload the most recent checkpoint file
+
+The cron job will perform these same steps in an automated fashion:
+ - pull latest mainnet archive dump, load into PostgresQL
+ - pull latest migrated database, load into PostgreSQL
+ - pull latest checkpoint file
+ - run first migration app against the two databases
+ - run second migration app, using the downloaded checkpoint file; checkpoint interval
+    should be smaller (perhaps 50), because there are typically only 200 or so blocks in a day
+ - upload migrated database
+ - upload most recent checkpoint file
+
+There should be monitoring of the cron job, in case there are errors.
+
+Just before the hard fork, the last few blocks can be migrated by running locally:
+- download the mainnet archive data directly from the k8s PostgreSQL node, not from
+  the archive dump, load it into PostgreSQL
+- download the most recent migrated database, load it into PostgresQL
+- download the most recent checkpoint file
+- run the first migration application against the two database
+- run the second migration application using the most recent checkpoint file
+
+It is worthwhile to perform these last steps as a `dry run` to make sure all goes
+well. Those steps can be run as many times as needed.
+
+## Drawbacks
+[drawbacks]: #drawbacks
+
+If we want mainnet data to be available after the hard fork, there
+needs to be migration of that data.
+
+## Rationale and alternatives
+[rationale-and-alternatives]: #rationale-and-alternatives
+
+It may be possible to add or delete columns in the original schema to
+perform some of the migration without transferring data between
+databases. It would still be necessary to add the windowing data from
+precomputed blocks, and to have a separate pass to populate the
+`accounts...` tables.
+
+## Prior art
+[prior-art]: #prior-art
+
+There are preliminary implementations of the two applications:
+
+- The first application is in branch `feature/berkeley-db-migrator`.
+Downloading precomputed blocks appears to be the main bottleneck there,
+so those blocks are downloaded in batches, which helps considerably.
+
+- The second application is in branch `feature/add-berkeley-accounts-tables`.
+
+There has been some local testing of these applications.
+
+The replayer cron jobs for mainnet, devnet, and berkeley can serve as
+a starting point for the implementation of the cron job described
+here.
+
+## Unresolved questions
+[unresolved-questions]: #unresolved-questions
+
+The second application populates the `accounts_created` table, but the
+first application could do so, by examining the
+`...account_creation_fee_paid` columns of the `blocks_user_commands`
+table in the mainnet schema. The current implementation relies on
+dynamic behavior, rather than static data, which overcomes potential
+errors in that data.