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

restore: split between tables (#42972) #43164

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: release-5.4
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

This is an automated cherry-pick of #42972

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #42924

Problem Summary:
When restoring tables, for optimization, we are not going to split between tables:
(Referencing #27240)

before:
--|-------t1 data-------|-----|---t2 data-------|
after: 
----------t1 data-------|---------t2 data-------|

Legends:
'|' the split point
'-' the key space

This works fine as long as we are restoring tables sequentially and restoring tables after we finish splitting. However, for now, in some scenarios:

  1. t2 starts its restoration, importing file to the very left region.
  2. t1 starts its restoration too, and split region from left to right -- the table may be huge and take a long time to split the regions.
  3. Newly split regions will be born from the very right region of t1, i.e. the very left region of t2. Which means... this region's epoch would change frequently, which probably blocks the import of t2.

What is changed and how it works?

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
    We detected this problem in an internal cluster, where v7.0.0 BR consistently fails, and with this PR we can restore to the cluster.
  • (Almost) No code

Release note

Please refer to Release Notes Language Style Guide to write a quality release note.

Fixed a bug that may cause BR failed to restore due to "epoch not match".

Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <ti-community-prow-bot@tidb.io>
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member Author

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has not been approved.

To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling /cc @reviewer in the comment.
After your PR has acquired the required number of LGTMs, you can assign this pull request to the committer in the list by filling /assign @committer in the comment to help you merge this pull request.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review.
Reviewer can cancel approval by submitting a request changes review.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot mentioned this pull request Apr 18, 2023
4 tasks
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member Author

This cherry pick PR is for a release branch and has not yet been approved by release team.
Adding the do-not-merge/cherry-pick-not-approved label.

To merge this cherry pick, it must first be approved by the collaborators.

AFTER it has been approved by collaborators, please ping the release team in a comment to request a cherry pick review.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added do-not-merge/cherry-pick-not-approved release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. type/cherry-pick-for-release-5.4 This PR is cherry-picked to release-5.4 from a source PR. labels Apr 18, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
do-not-merge/cherry-pick-not-approved release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. type/cherry-pick-for-release-5.4 This PR is cherry-picked to release-5.4 from a source PR.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants