Add workspace database schema by mprahl · Pull Request #18909 · mlflow/mlflow

mprahl · 2025-11-19T04:20:10Z

🛠 DevTools 🛠

Install mlflow from this PR

# mlflow
pip install git+https://github.com/mlflow/mlflow.git@refs/pull/18909/merge
# mlflow-skinny
pip install git+https://github.com/mlflow/mlflow.git@refs/pull/18909/merge#subdirectory=libs/skinny

For Databricks, use the following command:

%sh curl -LsSf https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mlflow/mlflow/HEAD/dev/install-skinny.sh | sh -s pull/18909/merge

Related Issues/PRs

First split from #18869.

#1464
#5844
Design document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IbFfceCmWV3knJfc0ninn58EXLVbHUh1meV_pknOM40/edit

What changes are proposed in this pull request?

This adds the required workspace columns and the workspace catalog table with the default workspace precreated. All workspace columns default to "default" for now and we may choose to remove the defaults once the tracking store and model registry store are made workspace aware to catch application logic issues not properly setting the workspace.

Some model registry store changes were needed to account for the new composite foreign key.

How is this PR tested?

Existing unit/integration tests
New unit/integration tests
Manual tests

Does this PR require documentation update?

Release Notes

Is this a user-facing change?

No. You can skip the rest of this section.
Yes. Give a description of this change to be included in the release notes for MLflow users.

What component(s), interfaces, languages, and integrations does this PR affect?

Components

How should the PR be classified in the release notes? Choose one:

rn/none - No description will be included. The PR will be mentioned only by the PR number in the "Small Bugfixes and Documentation Updates" section
rn/breaking-change - The PR will be mentioned in the "Breaking Changes" section
rn/feature - A new user-facing feature worth mentioning in the release notes
rn/bug-fix - A user-facing bug fix worth mentioning in the release notes
rn/documentation - A user-facing documentation change worth mentioning in the release notes

Should this PR be included in the next patch release?

Yes should be selected for bug fixes, documentation updates, and other small changes. No should be selected for new features and larger changes. If you're unsure about the release classification of this PR, leave this unchecked to let the maintainers decide.

What is a minor/patch release?

Minor release: a release that increments the second part of the version number (e.g., 1.2.0 -> 1.3.0).
Bug fixes, doc updates and new features usually go into minor releases.
Patch release: a release that increments the third part of the version number (e.g., 1.2.0 -> 1.2.1).
Bug fixes and doc updates usually go into patch releases.

Yes (this PR will be cherry-picked and included in the next patch release)
No (this PR will be included in the next minor release)

mprahl · 2025-11-19T04:21:16Z

FYI @B-Step62

B-Step62

@mprahl The change looks good to me. Can we point the PR to a feature branch here?

https://github.com/mlflow/mlflow/tree/orgnization-support

For context, we have high cadence of new version release (at least once a month) and they are often cut from master. While the initial implementation is more or less ready in your side, we still likely need multiple weeks until safely land the entire changes and test them throuhghly. We want to avoid including partial changes into release while it is not fully functional.

Drift between master and feature branch would be a bit annoying, but I believe it is not too bad if we sync them regularly.

B-Step62 · 2025-11-19T14:05:57Z

@dbczumar @BenWilson2 Could you give another eyes at the PR? Thanks!

github-actions · 2025-11-19T14:19:58Z

Documentation preview for 1f0b624 is available at:

https://pr-18909--mlflow-docs-preview.netlify.app/docs/latest/

More info

Ignore this comment if this PR does not change the documentation.
The preview is updated when a new commit is pushed to this PR.
This comment was created by this workflow run.
The documentation was built by this workflow run.

mprahl · 2025-11-19T14:31:07Z

@mprahl The change looks good to me. Can we point the PR to a feature branch here?

https://github.com/mlflow/mlflow/tree/orgnization-support

For context, we have high cadence of new version release (at least once a month) and they are often cut from master. While the initial implementation is more or less ready in your side, we still likely need multiple weeks until safely land the entire changes and test them throuhghly. We want to avoid including partial changes into release while it is not fully functional.

Drift between master and feature branch would be a bit annoying, but I believe it is not too bad if we sync them regularly.

Thanks for the quick review! I just changed the base branch of the PR.

This adds the required workspace columns and the workspace catalog table with the default workspace precreated. All workspace columns default to "default" for now and we may choose to remove the defaults once the tracking store and model registry store are made workspace aware to catch application logic issues not properly setting the workspace. Some model registry store changes were needed to account for the new composite foreign key. Signed-off-by: mprahl <mprahl@users.noreply.github.com>

mprahl · 2025-11-19T14:36:44Z

@B-Step62 I just rebased on the new branch. Could you please approve the workflows again?

BenWilson2

Would it be more appropriate to have the fields added to each table be workspace id's instead of the unique workspace name that is stored?
I have a feeling that an inner join based on the active workspace (as a name -> id mapping table) to associated tables based on the ID might be better than access filtering based on a string value for the required updates to backend APIs. Curious to hear your thoughts on this one based on DB performance.

Test coverage looks great - thank you for validation of upgrade / downgrade.

mprahl · 2025-11-20T16:23:22Z

Would it be more appropriate to have the fields added to each table be workspace id's instead of the unique workspace name that is stored? I have a feeling that an inner join based on the active workspace (as a name -> id mapping table) to associated tables based on the ID might be better than access filtering based on a string value for the required updates to backend APIs. Curious to hear your thoughts on this one based on DB performance.

Test coverage looks great - thank you for validation of upgrade / downgrade.

I'll repost from my Slack comment for visibility:

The reason why I don't leverage foreign keys to a workspace ID is to allow workspace providers outside of the database (e.g. Kubernetes namespaces) to be compatible with the SQLAlchemy tracking and model registry stores. When using a workspace provider, the workspaces won't be stored in the database to avoid having to keep things in sync from the source of truth (e.g. Kubernetes).

BenWilson2

Thanks for the justification. No concerns here!

Signed-off-by: mprahl <mprahl@users.noreply.github.com>

github-actions bot added area/model-registry Model registry, model registry APIs, and the fluent client calls for model registry area/tracking Tracking service, tracking client APIs, autologging rn/none List under Small Changes in Changelogs. labels Nov 19, 2025

mprahl mentioned this pull request Nov 19, 2025

Implement workspace-aware multi-tenant backend support #18869

Closed

29 tasks

B-Step62 approved these changes Nov 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

B-Step62 requested review from BenWilson2 and dbczumar November 19, 2025 14:03

mprahl changed the base branch from master to orgnization-support November 19, 2025 14:30

mprahl force-pushed the workspaces-db-model branch from c0691c6 to 1f0b624 Compare November 19, 2025 14:35

B-Step62 self-assigned this Nov 19, 2025

BenWilson2 reviewed Nov 20, 2025

View reviewed changes

BenWilson2 approved these changes Nov 20, 2025

View reviewed changes

B-Step62 merged commit 5b68933 into mlflow:orgnization-support Nov 21, 2025
67 of 69 checks passed

mprahl added a commit to opendatahub-io/mlflow that referenced this pull request Nov 21, 2025

Add workspace database schema (mlflow#18909)

2b8d8ff

Signed-off-by: mprahl <mprahl@users.noreply.github.com>

mprahl added a commit to mprahl/mlflow that referenced this pull request Nov 27, 2025

Add workspace database schema (mlflow#18909)

8367f2f

Signed-off-by: mprahl <mprahl@users.noreply.github.com>

This was referenced Nov 30, 2025

Add workspace support for the tracking store #19116

Merged

WIP: Add workspace REST and CLI functionality #19172

Closed

B-Step62 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2025

Add workspace database schema (#18909)

643e931

Signed-off-by: mprahl <mprahl@users.noreply.github.com>

mprahl added a commit to mprahl/mlflow that referenced this pull request Jan 16, 2026

Add workspace database schema (mlflow#18909)

7eff3ca

Signed-off-by: mprahl <mprahl@users.noreply.github.com>

B-Step62 pushed a commit to B-Step62/mlflow that referenced this pull request Jan 19, 2026

Add workspace database schema (mlflow#18909)

b8df256

Signed-off-by: mprahl <mprahl@users.noreply.github.com>

ahadas pushed a commit to ahadas/mlflow that referenced this pull request Jan 27, 2026

Add workspace database schema (mlflow#18909)

5929fa2

Signed-off-by: mprahl <mprahl@users.noreply.github.com>

B-Step62 pushed a commit to B-Step62/mlflow that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2026

Add workspace database schema (mlflow#18909)

403649e

Signed-off-by: mprahl <mprahl@users.noreply.github.com>

mprahl added a commit to mprahl/mlflow that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2026

Add workspace database schema (mlflow#18909)

f66188f

Signed-off-by: mprahl <mprahl@users.noreply.github.com>

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add workspace database schema#18909

Add workspace database schema#18909
B-Step62 merged 1 commit intomlflow:orgnization-supportfrom
mprahl:workspaces-db-model

mprahl commented Nov 19, 2025 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

Uh oh!

mprahl commented Nov 19, 2025

Uh oh!

B-Step62 left a comment

Uh oh!

B-Step62 commented Nov 19, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Nov 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

mprahl commented Nov 19, 2025

Uh oh!

mprahl commented Nov 19, 2025

Uh oh!

BenWilson2 left a comment

Uh oh!

mprahl commented Nov 20, 2025

Uh oh!

BenWilson2 left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Conversation

mprahl commented Nov 19, 2025 • edited by github-actions bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Install mlflow from this PR

Related Issues/PRs

What changes are proposed in this pull request?

How is this PR tested?

Does this PR require documentation update?

Release Notes

Is this a user-facing change?

What component(s), interfaces, languages, and integrations does this PR affect?

How should the PR be classified in the release notes? Choose one:

Should this PR be included in the next patch release?

Uh oh!

mprahl commented Nov 19, 2025

Uh oh!

B-Step62 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

B-Step62 commented Nov 19, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Nov 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mprahl commented Nov 19, 2025

Uh oh!

mprahl commented Nov 19, 2025

Uh oh!

BenWilson2 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mprahl commented Nov 20, 2025

Uh oh!

BenWilson2 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

mprahl commented Nov 19, 2025 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

github-actions bot commented Nov 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading