-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 409
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
fix anti semi join (release-7.5) #8792
fix anti semi join (release-7.5) #8792
Conversation
Signed-off-by: xufei <xufeixw@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
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
/run-all-tests |
@@ -1304,6 +1304,9 @@ Block Join::doJoinBlockHash(ProbeProcessInfo & probe_process_info) const | |||
offsets_to_replicate->assign( | |||
offsets_to_replicate->begin() + probe_process_info.start_row, | |||
offsets_to_replicate->begin() + probe_process_info.end_row); | |||
if (isAntiJoin(kind) && filter != nullptr) | |||
filter->assign(filter->begin() + probe_process_info.start_row, |
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.
Better not to use assign
because it uses memcpy
which has an undefined behavior if two memory locations are overlapped.
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 aggree, but since it is close to the release deadline, I suggest we keep assign
in this pr and fix it later since assign
is used many places, it will bring extra risk if we change too many in this pr.
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.
ok
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: gengliqi, yibin87 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created to branch |
Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <ti-community-prow-bot@tidb.io>
I think you should update the release note to describe what bug has been fixed |
Done |
What problem does this PR solve?
Issue Number: close #8791
Problem Summary:
Ref #8791 for details
What is changed and how it works?
Check List
Tests
Side effects
Documentation
Release note