[Revert](merge-on-write) Don't use delete bitmap to mark delete for rows with delete sign when sequence column doesn't exist #26721
Conversation
|
run buildall |
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
|
TeamCity be ut coverage result: |
|
(From new machine)TeamCity pipeline, clickbench performance test result: |
TPC-H test result on machine: 'aliyun_ecs.c7a.8xlarge_32C64G' |
github-actions
bot
added
the
approved
|
PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested. |
|
PR approved by anyone and no changes requested. |
regression-test/suites/unique_with_mow_p0/partial_update/test_partial_update_delete_sign.groovy
Show resolved
Hide resolved
bobhan1
force-pushed
the
remove-delete-sign-delete-bitmap-mark
branch
from
21f6a42 to
04c7244
Compare
|
run buildall |
github-actions
bot
removed
the
approved
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
github-actions
bot
added
the
approved
|
PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested. |
|
TeamCity be ut coverage result: |
|
(From new machine)TeamCity pipeline, clickbench performance test result: |
TPC-H test result on machine: 'aliyun_ecs.c7a.8xlarge_32C64G' |
|
run pipelinex_p0 |
…ows with delete sign when sequence column doesn't exist (apache#26721)
…ows with delete sign when sequence column doesn't exist (apache#26721)
…rows with delete sign (#36210) Issue Number: close #34296 1. When partial update filling in the missing fields, if a load job previously wrote data with a delete sign, it will also read out the data in the column with the delete sign, so that the newly written data will also become invisible 2. This problem was fixed in #24877, but was introduced again in #26721, and was never found because the case was changed to the wrong output in #26721. 3. The fix in #24877 didn't take into account the handling of concurrent conflicts in the publish phase, the current PR adds this part of the handling, and adds the corresponding case.
…rows with delete sign (#36210) Issue Number: close #34296 1. When partial update filling in the missing fields, if a load job previously wrote data with a delete sign, it will also read out the data in the column with the delete sign, so that the newly written data will also become invisible 2. This problem was fixed in #24877, but was introduced again in #26721, and was never found because the case was changed to the wrong output in #26721. 3. The fix in #24877 didn't take into account the handling of concurrent conflicts in the publish phase, the current PR adds this part of the handling, and adds the corresponding case.
…rows with delete sign (apache#36210) Issue Number: close apache#34296 1. When partial update filling in the missing fields, if a load job previously wrote data with a delete sign, it will also read out the data in the column with the delete sign, so that the newly written data will also become invisible 2. This problem was fixed in apache#24877, but was introduced again in apache#26721, and was never found because the case was changed to the wrong output in 3. The fix in apache#24877 didn't take into account the handling of concurrent conflicts in the publish phase, the current PR adds this part of the handling, and adds the corresponding case.
…rows with delete sign (apache#36210) Issue Number: close apache#34296 1. When partial update filling in the missing fields, if a load job previously wrote data with a delete sign, it will also read out the data in the column with the delete sign, so that the newly written data will also become invisible 2. This problem was fixed in apache#24877, but was introduced again in apache#26721, and was never found because the case was changed to the wrong output in 3. The fix in apache#24877 didn't take into account the handling of concurrent conflicts in the publish phase, the current PR adds this part of the handling, and adds the corresponding case.
5 participants
Proposed changes
This PR reverts the optimization for delete sign in #24011
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...