-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 598
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
refactor(storage): fix confusing naming #18701
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I unconditionally support this PR, the naming of table_infos
is so confusing!
proto/hummock.proto
Outdated
@@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ message OverlappingLevel { | |||
message Level { | |||
uint32 level_idx = 1; | |||
LevelType level_type = 2; | |||
repeated SstableInfo table_infos = 3; | |||
repeated SstableInfo sstable_infos = 3; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
These fields are persisted in meta store. Is it safe to rename to break the backward compatibility?
I think changing the in memory struct in hummock_sdk
should be enough
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is it safe to rename to break the backward compatibility?
Renaming is safe because protobuf identifies fields by their number. I've tested it as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For metadata stored in etcd backend, we use the protobuf encoding, but for those stored in sql backend, which are encoded as json, I think the fields are identified by their names.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
blob rather than json is used in sql backend, so backward compatibility is retained.
But since we rarely use pb type directly any longer, this PR will keep pb names unchanged.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
This PR has been open for 60 days with no activity. If it's blocked by code review, feel free to ping a reviewer or ask someone else to review it. If you think it is still relevant today, and have time to work on it in the near future, you can comment to update the status, or just manually remove the You can also confidently close this PR to keep our backlog clean. (If no further action taken, the PR will be automatically closed after 7 days. Sorry! 🙏) |
Close this PR as there's no further actions taken after it is marked as stale for 7 days. Sorry! 🙏 You can reopen it when you have time to continue working on it. |
I hereby agree to the terms of the RisingWave Labs, Inc. Contributor License Agreement.
What's changed and what's your intention?
This PR simply renames some fields from
table_info
tosstable_info
.There're some fields of
SstableInfo
type namedtable_info
. The naming is misleading, regarding whether thetable
refers to sstable or state table.As this PR modifies numerous files, it should be merged only when no other complex open PRs are pending, to avoid conflicts.
Checklist
./risedev check
(or alias,./risedev c
)Documentation
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.