From 265181550e3f8c73bcbdce94f78798c6b6a5e715 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Noel Kwan Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2023 16:09:59 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] make compile --- src/stream/src/executor/backfill/arrangement_backfill.rs | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/stream/src/executor/backfill/arrangement_backfill.rs b/src/stream/src/executor/backfill/arrangement_backfill.rs index e19d9a2b5010f..67f6ae95b7512 100644 --- a/src/stream/src/executor/backfill/arrangement_backfill.rs +++ b/src/stream/src/executor/backfill/arrangement_backfill.rs @@ -34,8 +34,8 @@ use risingwave_storage::StateStore; use crate::common::table::state_table::{ReplicatedStateTable, StateTable}; use crate::executor::backfill::utils::{ compute_bounds, construct_initial_finished_state, get_progress_per_vnode, iter_chunks, - mapping_chunk, mapping_message, mark_chunk_ref_by_vnode, persist_state_per_vnode, - update_pos_by_vnode, BackfillProgressPerVnode, BackfillState, + mapping_chunk, mapping_message, mark_chunk_ref_by_vnode, owned_row_iter, + persist_state_per_vnode, update_pos_by_vnode, BackfillProgressPerVnode, BackfillState, }; use crate::executor::monitor::StreamingMetrics; use crate::executor::{ @@ -580,13 +580,13 @@ where .await?; // TODO: Is there some way to avoid double-pin here? - let vnode_row_iter = Box::pin(vnode_row_iter); + let vnode_row_iter = Box::pin(owned_row_iter(vnode_row_iter)); let vnode_chunk_iter = iter_chunks(vnode_row_iter, builder).map_ok(move |chunk| (vnode, chunk)); // TODO: Is there some way to avoid double-pin - // NOTE(kwannoel): We iterate serially instead. + // FIXME(kwannoel): Should we iterate serially? Or in parallel? #[for_await] for chunk in vnode_chunk_iter { yield Some(chunk?);