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

bug: fix slice init length #16674

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 28, 2024
Merged

bug: fix slice init length #16674

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 28, 2024

Conversation

cuishuang
Copy link
Contributor

@cuishuang cuishuang commented Aug 28, 2024

Description

fix slice init length

Related Issue(s)

Checklist

  • "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported to release branches
  • If this change is to be back-ported to previous releases, a justification is included in the PR description
  • Tests were added or are not required
  • Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on CI?
  • Documentation was added or is not required

Deployment Notes

@cuishuang cuishuang requested a review from deepthi as a code owner August 28, 2024 06:41
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Aug 28, 2024

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 NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required 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 Aug 28, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v21.0.0 milestone Aug 28, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 28, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 68.91%. Comparing base (773a216) to head (9043f0d).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
go/trace/trace.go 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #16674      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   68.92%   68.91%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1562     1562              
  Lines      200941   200941              
==========================================
- Hits       138497   138481      -16     
- Misses      62444    62460      +16     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@@ -189,7 +189,7 @@ func StartTracing(serviceName string) io.Closer {
}

func fail(serviceName string) io.Closer {
options := make([]string, len(tracingBackendFactories))
options := make([]string, 0, len(tracingBackendFactories))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is a good catch. The bug is that we are allocating a slice with empty strings and then appending to it, so we end up with a slice that is twice as long as it really needs to be. Another way of fixing it would have been to set the already allocated elements instead of appending to the slice, but this is cleaner.

@deepthi deepthi added Type: Internal Cleanup Component: General Changes throughout the code base 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 NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required labels Aug 28, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@mattlord mattlord left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks, @cuishuang !

@mattlord mattlord merged commit d0d2679 into vitessio:main Aug 28, 2024
136 of 141 checks passed
@cuishuang
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks, @cuishuang !

My pleasure.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Component: General Changes throughout the code base Type: Internal Cleanup
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants