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

fix(storage): use per-table committed epoch in read version update #17744

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jul 23, 2024

Conversation

wenym1
Copy link
Contributor

@wenym1 wenym1 commented Jul 18, 2024

I hereby agree to the terms of the RisingWave Labs, Inc. Contributor License Agreement.

What's changed and what's your intention?

In HummockReadVersion update, we still use the global max committed epoch. In this PR we will change to use the per table committed epoch

Checklist

  • I have written necessary rustdoc comments
  • I have added necessary unit tests and integration tests
  • I have added test labels as necessary. See details.
  • I have added fuzzing tests or opened an issue to track them. (Optional, recommended for new SQL features Sqlsmith: Sql feature generation #7934).
  • My PR contains breaking changes. (If it deprecates some features, please create a tracking issue to remove them in the future).
  • All checks passed in ./risedev check (or alias, ./risedev c)
  • My PR changes performance-critical code. (Please run macro/micro-benchmarks and show the results.)
  • My PR contains critical fixes that are necessary to be merged into the latest release. (Please check out the details)

Documentation

  • My PR needs documentation updates. (Please use the Release note section below to summarize the impact on users)

Release note

If this PR includes changes that directly affect users or other significant modifications relevant to the community, kindly draft a release note to provide a concise summary of these changes. Please prioritize highlighting the impact these changes will have on users.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the type/fix Bug fix label Jul 18, 2024
Copy link
Collaborator

@hzxa21 hzxa21 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Rest LGTM

Comment on lines 47 to 48
latest_epoch: Option<HummockEpoch>,
committed_epoch: Option<HummockEpoch>,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In which case will these two be None?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Previously, when an empty WatermarkIndex is created, the latest_epoch is None, but now I just realize that the latest_epoch can always be Some(_), because all WatermarkIndex::new is followed by a add_epoch_watermark, so I change the new method to create the WatermarkIndex together with the first watermark, and then the latest_epoch can always be Some(_) and we can remove the Option.

The committed_epoch is None when a new watermark is written, but no data has ever been committed for this table, so the committed_epoch of this table id is None.

@wenym1 wenym1 added this pull request to the merge queue Jul 23, 2024
Merged via the queue into main with commit a26a4c1 Jul 23, 2024
30 of 31 checks passed
@wenym1 wenym1 deleted the yiming/fix-update-version-committed branch July 23, 2024 06:03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants