IGNITE-23604 Start a table driven implicit transaction for key-value plans #4927
+150
−113
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
xtern
force-pushed
the
ignite-23604
branch
2 times, most recently
from
8932980 to
c543788
Compare
xtern
changed the title
xtern
force-pushed
the
ignite-23604
branch
2 times, most recently
from
75a0461 to
df4379c
Compare
xtern
force-pushed
the
ignite-23604
branch
4 times, most recently
from
3b856f2 to
9b0563b
Compare
korlov42
reviewed
Dec 23, 2024
| // underlying table will initiate transaction by itself, but we need stub to reuse | ||
| // TxAwareAsyncCursor | ||
| txWrapper = NoopTransactionWrapper.INSTANCE; | ||
| txWrapper = plan.transactional() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the only "non-transactional" plan is SelectCountPlan which is more like temporal solution. I would prefer not to introduce transactional property on ExecutablePlan interface, and get rid of NoopTransactionWrapper instead
| @@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ public <RowT> Publisher<RowT> indexLookup( | |||
| @Override | |||
| public <RowT> CompletableFuture<RowT> primaryKeyLookup( | |||
| ExecutionContext<RowT> ctx, | |||
| @Nullable InternalTransaction explicitTx, | |||
| InternalTransaction tx, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think, it worth to add assertion making sure no-one is passing null instead of transaction
|
|
||
| if (projection != null) { | ||
| row = projection.apply(row); | ||
| try { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
does it make sense to move this try-catch on ExecutionServiceImpl level? This way we cover all the problem in a single place
| * @param tableDriven Indicates whether the implicit transaction will be managed by the table storage or the SQL engine. | ||
| * @return Transaction wrapper. | ||
| */ | ||
| QueryTransactionWrapper getOrStartImplicit(boolean readOnly, boolean tableDriven); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
perhaps, it would be better to change names to getOrStartSqlManaged(readOnly, implicit), WDYT?
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-23604