Skip to content

projections fixes#17388

Closed
clintropolis wants to merge 8 commits intoapache:masterfrom
clintropolis:fix-projection-merge
Closed

projections fixes#17388
clintropolis wants to merge 8 commits intoapache:masterfrom
clintropolis:fix-projection-merge

Conversation

@clintropolis
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

changes:

  • fix issue when merging projections from multiple-incremental persists which was hoping that some 'dim conversion' buffers were not closed, but they already were (by the merging iterator). fix involves recreating the merging iterator to rebuild the dim conversions, which is sad, but maybe better than keeping the buffers open for the entire lifetime of the segment writeout
  • fix queryable index projection to not put the time-like column as a dimension, instead only adding it as __time

changes:
* fix issue when merging projections from multiple-incremental persists which was hoping that some 'dim conversion' buffers were not closed, but they already were (by the merging iterator). fix involves recreating the merging iterator to rebuild the dim conversions, which is sad, but maybe better than keeping the buffers open for the entire lifetime of the segment writeout
* fix queryable index projection to not put the time-like column as a dimension, instead only adding it as __time
@clintropolis clintropolis removed the WIP label Oct 22, 2024
getDictionaryMergingComparator(),
true
);
// iterate through merger to build dim conversions.. this is gross, but the alternative is holding open dim
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

would it make sense to write the conversions to a tmp file rather than holding buffers open or recomputing them?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ah yea, that makes sense, will explore that, already do something similar for the value dictionaries for nested columns. Do you think we should only do this if a column is used as a parent or would it be ok to just do always?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Probably only if it's used as a parent? Just to avoid using disk needlessly otherwise.

@clintropolis
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

closing in favor of #17460

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants