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

refactor: remove unexpected memory watermark update #19366

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 18, 2024
Merged

Conversation

zwang28
Copy link
Contributor

@zwang28 zwang28 commented Nov 13, 2024

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

What's changed and what's your intention?

Since watermark sequence is utilized for operator memory management, this ticker should be the sole location for setting the watermark.

This PR removes the additional watermark setting during BarrierKind::Initial. This operation introduces uncertainty, i.e.

  • operator cache may be purged by this very large watermark, which corresponds to the value of an epoch.
  • or may remain unchanged if the watermark is subsequently overwritten by the ticker, before any operator cache eviction.

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.

@zwang28 zwang28 requested review from MrCroxx and wenym1 November 13, 2024 05:25
@zwang28 zwang28 changed the title refactor: remove useless code refactor: remove unexpected memory watermark update Nov 13, 2024
@@ -531,11 +530,6 @@ impl LocalBarrierWorker {
barrier: &Barrier,
request: InjectBarrierRequest,
) -> StreamResult<()> {
if barrier.kind == BarrierKind::Initial {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Seems this is the only usage of watermark_epoch of actor_manager. If we don't use it anymore, we can remove it.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copy link
Contributor

@wenym1 wenym1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@hzxa21 hzxa21 requested review from MrCroxx and removed request for MrCroxx November 15, 2024 08:46
Copy link
Contributor

@MrCroxx MrCroxx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@zwang28 zwang28 enabled auto-merge November 18, 2024 11:45
@zwang28 zwang28 added this pull request to the merge queue Nov 18, 2024
Merged via the queue into main with commit f5537d9 Nov 18, 2024
29 of 30 checks passed
@zwang28 zwang28 deleted the wangzheng/fix_mem branch November 18, 2024 13:20
@hzxa21
Copy link
Collaborator

hzxa21 commented Nov 19, 2024

Should we cherry pick to 2.1?

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.

4 participants