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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
*: Check index number in txn #29453
*: Check index number in txn #29453
Changes from 13 commits
1f41bd3
c99a35f
92c91f0
98b9985
a448ac4
e5545a0
571a488
b985104
5cb41f9
d829187
995a8e2
909a7aa
9e58e0b
bc408fd
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Does it process entries that's not modified but pessimistic-locked? Can it work with this change?
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.
Yes it will process the locked but not changed keys, as each unique index key used to fetch rowkey will be turned into a
PUT
record, seems they are not compatibe, consider this:The number of
PUT
on row is 2 and the number ofPUT
on index is 5?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.
@ekexium
Seems @MyonKeminta has found a key point.
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.
Right.. it's an intentional special case. It seems to me we can't simply tell whether it comes from the optimization. A workaround might be adding a flag to indicate the special usage so they can be ignored in the check.
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.
The change is actually not expected and it's a temoprary solution to workaround the performance issues with many
LOCK
records in thewrite cf
. Maybe we could put back this check after solving theLOCK
record issue so that these tricky optimization or transformation could be removed.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'm thinking if there is a method to distinguish the usage and won't block removing it.
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.
If we have to add some new flags to membuffer to handle this, I would suspect whether it worths...
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.
We could add some comments to explain the proof or invariant here.