executor: refactor hashjoin part6#39531
Conversation
|
[REVIEW NOTIFICATION] This pull request has been approved by:
To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. DetailsReviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review. |
| } | ||
| chk := e.ctx.GetSessionVars().GetNewChunkWithCapacity(e.buildWorker.buildSideExec.base().retFieldTypes, e.ctx.GetSessionVars().MaxChunkSize, e.ctx.GetSessionVars().MaxChunkSize, e.AllocPool) | ||
| err = Next(ctx, e.buildWorker.buildSideExec, chk) | ||
| chk := w.hashJoinCtx.sessCtx.GetSessionVars().GetNewChunkWithCapacity(w.buildSideExec.base().retFieldTypes, w.hashJoinCtx.sessCtx.GetSessionVars().MaxChunkSize, w.hashJoinCtx.sessCtx.GetSessionVars().MaxChunkSize, w.hashJoinCtx.sessCtx.GetSessionVars().ChunkPool.Alloc) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Make w.hashJoinCtx.sessCtx.GetSessionVars() as sessVars to avoid dup code?
|
/merge |
|
This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge. DetailsCommit hash: dc4e7b9 |
TiDB MergeCI notify🔴 Bad News! [3] CI still failing after this pr merged.
|
This reverts commit 7dedfab.
This reverts commit 7dedfab.
What problem does this PR solve?
Issue Number: ref #39061
Problem Summary:
What is changed and how it works?
Check List
Tests
Side effects
Documentation
Release note
Please refer to Release Notes Language Style Guide to write a quality release note.