-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.7k
[Enhancement](merge-on-write) add correctness check for the calculation of delete bitmap #22282
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
Conversation
|
run buildall |
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
|
(From new machine)TeamCity pipeline, clickbench performance test result: |
8263490 to
cb0c90a
Compare
|
run buildall |
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
1 similar comment
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
|
(From new machine)TeamCity pipeline, clickbench performance test result: |
|
run buildall |
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
|
run buildall |
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
c3a520f to
76dd34b
Compare
|
run buildall |
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
|
(From new machine)TeamCity pipeline, clickbench performance test result: |
|
(From new machine)TeamCity pipeline, clickbench performance test result: |
|
run buildall |
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
|
(From new machine)TeamCity pipeline, clickbench performance test result: |
5d9594f to
165f952
Compare
|
run buildall |
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
1 similar comment
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
liaoxin01
left a comment
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.
LGTM
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
|
run buildall |
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
|
(From new machine)TeamCity pipeline, clickbench performance test result: |
zhannngchen
left a comment
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.
LGTM
|
run buildall |
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
|
run buildall |
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
|
(From new machine)TeamCity pipeline, clickbench performance test result: |
|
(From new machine)TeamCity pipeline, clickbench performance test result: |
|
run arm |
zhannngchen
left a comment
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.
LGTM
|
PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested. |
…on of delete bitmap (#22282) Currently, for merge-on-write unique table, the delete bitmap of a rowset will be calculated during flush phase, commit phase and publish phase. In this PR, we add a special mark in every rowset considered when we calculate delete bitmap in these three phases. Before we finally merge the delete bitmap to the table meta's delete bitmap, we will check if all the rowsets contain the special mark to check if we have considered all the rowsets during the above three phases. Because the executor can not fail in publish phase if the coordinator have received successful commits info from all the executors, we just print logs if this correctness check failed rather than report a failure.
Proposed changes
Currently, for merge-on-write unique table, the delete bitmap of a rowset will be calculated during flush phase, commit phase and publish phase. In this PR, we add a special mark in every rowset considered when we calculate delete bitmap in these three phases. Before we finally merge the delete bitmap to the table meta's delete bitmap, we will check if all the rowsets contain the special mark to check if we have considered all the rowsets during the above three phases.
Because the executor can not fail in publish phase if the coordinator have received successful commits info from all the executors, we just print logs if this correctness check failed rather than report a failure.
Further comments
If this is a relatively large or complex change, kick off the discussion at dev@doris.apache.org by explaining why you chose the solution you did and what alternatives you considered, etc...