Skip to content
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

[BugFix] Fix online optimize conflict with expression partition #52074

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

meegoo
Copy link
Contributor

@meegoo meegoo commented Oct 18, 2024

Why I'm doing:

What I'm doing:

Fixes https://github.com/StarRocks/StarRocksTest/issues/8485

What type of PR is this:

  • BugFix
  • Feature
  • Enhancement
  • Refactor
  • UT
  • Doc
  • Tool

Does this PR entail a change in behavior?

  • Yes, this PR will result in a change in behavior.
  • No, this PR will not result in a change in behavior.

If yes, please specify the type of change:

  • Interface/UI changes: syntax, type conversion, expression evaluation, display information
  • Parameter changes: default values, similar parameters but with different default values
  • Policy changes: use new policy to replace old one, functionality automatically enabled
  • Feature removed
  • Miscellaneous: upgrade & downgrade compatibility, etc.

Checklist:

  • I have added test cases for my bug fix or my new feature
  • This pr needs user documentation (for new or modified features or behaviors)
    • I have added documentation for my new feature or new function
  • This is a backport pr

Bugfix cherry-pick branch check:

  • I have checked the version labels which the pr will be auto-backported to the target branch
    • 3.3
    • 3.2
    • 3.1
    • 3.0
    • 2.5

@meegoo meegoo requested review from a team as code owners October 18, 2024 03:37
@mergify mergify bot assigned meegoo Oct 18, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added the 3.3 label Oct 18, 2024
@meegoo meegoo enabled auto-merge (squash) October 18, 2024 06:43
gengjun-git
gengjun-git previously approved these changes Oct 18, 2024
be/src/runtime/local_tablets_channel.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -196,7 +196,8 @@ public enum OlapTableState {
* The query plan which is generate during this state is invalid because the meta
* during the creation of the logical plan and the physical plan might be inconsistent.
*/
UPDATING_META
UPDATING_META,
OPTIMIZE
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

are there any compatibility issues with upgrade or rollback when optimize job is running?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it should be compatibility with upgrade or downgrade since replay will update table state.

Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Oct 18, 2024

Copy link

[Java-Extensions Incremental Coverage Report]

pass : 0 / 0 (0%)

Copy link

[FE Incremental Coverage Report]

pass : 19 / 21 (90.48%)

file detail

path covered_line new_line coverage not_covered_line_detail
🔵 com/starrocks/server/LocalMetastore.java 2 4 50.00% [4779, 4780]
🔵 com/starrocks/alter/OptimizeJobV2.java 1 1 100.00% []
🔵 com/starrocks/catalog/OlapTable.java 2 2 100.00% []
🔵 com/starrocks/alter/OnlineOptimizeJobV2.java 2 2 100.00% []
🔵 com/starrocks/alter/OptimizeJobV2Builder.java 1 1 100.00% []
🔵 com/starrocks/alter/AlterOpType.java 1 1 100.00% []
🔵 com/starrocks/alter/AlterJobV2.java 5 5 100.00% []
🔵 com/starrocks/catalog/CatalogUtils.java 2 2 100.00% []
🔵 com/starrocks/alter/SchemaChangeHandler.java 3 3 100.00% []

Copy link

[BE Incremental Coverage Report]

pass : 14 / 16 (87.50%)

file detail

path covered_line new_line coverage not_covered_line_detail
🔵 be/src/runtime/local_tablets_channel.cpp 12 14 85.71% [773, 774]
🔵 be/src/exec/tablet_sink_index_channel.cpp 2 2 100.00% []

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants