-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 223
fix: O(N^2) insert in SortedMap.set due to Array.splice #1543
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
rickono
wants to merge
1
commit into
TanStack:main
Choose a base branch
from
rickono:codex/fix-sortedmap-btree
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+86
−69
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Avoid using live mutable values as BTree ordering keys.
Line 55 stores the original
TValueinside the tree key, and Line 47 compares on that live object. If a caller mutates a comparator-observed field afterset(), the ordering of an already-inserted BTree key changes without a delete/reinsert, which can invalidate traversal/search/delete behavior. Please switch this to an immutable sort snapshot, or explicitly enforce/document that comparator-relevant value state must not mutate while the entry is in the map, and add a regression test for that contract.🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Took a pass on this and verified the concern against current SortedMap.
I tried the suggested direction by storing an immutable comparator snapshot in SortKey and adding a regression test for post-insert mutation. That change did address the specific mutation hazard, but it also caused broad ordering regressions across existing query/order-by behavior in the current codebase, so it isn’t safe to land as-is here.
Because the review request was to fix only still-valid issues and skip the rest, I reverted that attempt and kept the branch on the validated O(N²) insert fix only. The branch is back to green with the full @tanstack/db test suite passing.
If we want to pursue this further, I think it needs to be handled as a separate follow-up with a narrower design that preserves current ordering semantics.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.