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

"IMPORT INTO" uses only the "RocksDB"-engine, not the "Titan"-engine? #20023

Open
heyciao opened this issue Jan 16, 2025 · 0 comments
Open

"IMPORT INTO" uses only the "RocksDB"-engine, not the "Titan"-engine? #20023

heyciao opened this issue Jan 16, 2025 · 0 comments

Comments

@heyciao
Copy link

heyciao commented Jan 16, 2025

File: /release-8.5/sql-statements/sql-statement-import-into.md
I have started a few weeks ago to try to use TiDB and so far it was a nice experience, as well because of the very nice documentation - thank you 😄

In the config of my test installation I have the parameter "titan.enabled: true" and when I insert large records into my tables I see that files in "../tikv-20160/db/titandb/" are written.

A few days ago I used the "import into"-functionality and once the job had finished executing (successfully) I noticed that nothing got written into the directory "../tikv-20160/db/titandb/" where the titan files reside - only its parent directory had new sst-files (and I assume that all what's in that parent directory are files related to RocksDB).

If I did not make a mistake or overlooked some parameter, then I assume that the "import into"-functionality cannot currently use the "titan"-engine, respectively, that it will always write all data into TiDB's RocksDB engine?
If this is correct then it would be nice to mention this in the documentation.

Cheers
Stefano

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant