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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

refactor: minor cleanups in planner code #14642

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 30, 2023
Merged

refactor: minor cleanups in planner code #14642

merged 2 commits into from
Nov 30, 2023

Conversation

systay
Copy link
Collaborator

@systay systay commented Nov 30, 2023

Description

While working on a bugfix, I had to extend the simplifier and improve logging. This shouldn't get backported, so I split it into a separate PR.

Related Issue(s)

#14641

Checklist

  • "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported
  • Tests were added or are not required
  • Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on the CI
  • Documentation was added or is not required

@systay
refactor: clean up phase logic
c3a009f 
Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>
@systay
cleanup: small cleanups
c94176b 
Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>
@vitess-bot vitess-bot
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Nov 30, 2023

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

  • Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

  • Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
  • New features should be documented.
  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
  • There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

  • Is this flag really necessary?
  • Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

  • Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
  • If the workflow needs to be marked as required, the maintainer team must be notified.

Backward compatibility

  • Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
  • Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
  • RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
  • If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from vitess-operator and arewefastyet, if used there.
  • vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.

@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot added NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels Nov 30, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v19.0.0 milestone Nov 30, 2023
@systay systay added Type: Internal Cleanup Component: Query Serving and removed NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request labels Nov 30, 2023
systay
systay commented Nov 30, 2023
View reviewed changes
go/vt/vtgate/planbuilder/operators/phases.go
if phas.shouldRun(ctx.SemTable.QuerySignature) {
p.current = p.current + 1
return phas
for {
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

the old code for this was wrong, and we were hitting some phases twice. didn't really make a noticeable difference in plan outputs, but it took longer than needed to run.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

good catch

@systay systay merged commit e818ca5 into vitessio:main Nov 30, 2023
119 of 121 checks passed
@systay systay deleted the apa_mono_monkey branch November 30, 2023 12:13
ejortegau referenced this pull request in slackhq/vitess Dec 13, 2023
@systay @ejortegau
refactor: minor cleanups in planner code (#14642)
c1790dd
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@harshit-gangal harshit-gangal harshit-gangal approved these changes

@dbussink dbussink dbussink approved these changes

@frouioui frouioui Awaiting requested review from frouioui frouioui is a code owner

@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 Awaiting requested review from GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 is a code owner

@arthurschreiber arthurschreiber Awaiting requested review from arthurschreiber arthurschreiber is a code owner

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Component: Query Serving Type: Internal Cleanup
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v19.0.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@systay @dbussink @harshit-gangal