-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.7k
[fix](load) fix priority queue order in memtable memory limiter #41278
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
|
Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris. Since 2024-03-18, the Document has been moved to doris-website. |
|
run buildall |
xinyiZzz
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. |
|
PR approved by anyone and no changes requested. |
|
TeamCity be ut coverage result: |
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
…he#41278) ## Proposed changes apache#41018 used priority queue when selecting memtables to flush. But the compare function is wrong and causing the order to be the opposite. > Note that the Compare parameter is defined such that it returns true if its first argument comes before its second argument in a weak ordering. But because the priority queue outputs largest elements first, the elements that "come before" are actually output last. That is, the front of the queue contains the "last" element according to the weak ordering imposed by Compare. This PR fixes the compare function to make larger memtables come front.
…he#41278) ## Proposed changes apache#41018 used priority queue when selecting memtables to flush. But the compare function is wrong and causing the order to be the opposite. > Note that the Compare parameter is defined such that it returns true if its first argument comes before its second argument in a weak ordering. But because the priority queue outputs largest elements first, the elements that "come before" are actually output last. That is, the front of the queue contains the "last" element according to the weak ordering imposed by Compare. This PR fixes the compare function to make larger memtables come front.
…he#41278) ## Proposed changes apache#41018 used priority queue when selecting memtables to flush. But the compare function is wrong and causing the order to be the opposite. > Note that the Compare parameter is defined such that it returns true if its first argument comes before its second argument in a weak ordering. But because the priority queue outputs largest elements first, the elements that "come before" are actually output last. That is, the front of the queue contains the "last" element according to the weak ordering imposed by Compare. This PR fixes the compare function to make larger memtables come front.
…he#41278) ## Proposed changes apache#41018 used priority queue when selecting memtables to flush. But the compare function is wrong and causing the order to be the opposite. > Note that the Compare parameter is defined such that it returns true if its first argument comes before its second argument in a weak ordering. But because the priority queue outputs largest elements first, the elements that "come before" are actually output last. That is, the front of the queue contains the "last" element according to the weak ordering imposed by Compare. This PR fixes the compare function to make larger memtables come front.
Proposed changes
#41018 used priority queue when selecting memtables to flush.
But the compare function is wrong and causing the order to be the opposite.
This PR fixes the compare function to make larger memtables come front.