Add batch split #6
Merged
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
Signed-off-by: Connor1996 <zbk602423539@gmail.com>
Connor1996
force-pushed
the
Connor1996-patch-1
branch
from
8bfcf46
to
27080ea
Compare
Signed-off-by: Connor1996 <zbk602423539@gmail.com>
|
PTAL @tikv/pingcap-i18n @zhangjinpeng1987 @siddontang |
solotzg
reviewed
Oct 25, 2018
Signed-off-by: Connor1996 <zbk602423539@gmail.com>
siddontang
reviewed
Oct 30, 2018
Signed-off-by: Connor1996 <zbk602423539@gmail.com>
|
@lilin90 PTAL. |
CaitinChen
reviewed
Nov 1, 2018
rleungx
reviewed
Nov 2, 2018
Signed-off-by: Connor1996 <zbk602423539@gmail.com>
Connor1996
force-pushed
the
Connor1996-patch-1
branch
from
aa2ea7c
to
300f8b3
Compare
Hoverbear
added
the
Migrated RFC
Hoverbear
reviewed
Nov 14, 2018
Hoverbear
reviewed
Nov 14, 2018
Signed-off-by: Connor1996 <zbk602423539@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Connor1996 <zbk602423539@gmail.com>
Connor1996
force-pushed
the
Connor1996-patch-1
branch
from
700a811
to
095d561
Compare
|
PTAL again |
Signed-off-by: Connor1996 <zbk602423539@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Connor1996 <zbk602423539@gmail.com>
text/2018-10-25-batch-split.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| ## Implementation in TiKV | ||
|
|
||
| ### How to produce multiple split keys |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do not overspecify the details in the RFC as doing so can bury the reviewer in minutiae.
IMO, this section is too detailed and not necessary.
|
PTAL again @huachaohuang |
| general logic of SizeChecker and KeysChecker are similar. The only difference | ||
| between them is one splits Region based on size and the other splits Region | ||
| based on the number of keys. So here we mainly describe the logic of | ||
| SizeChecker: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually, I think the following two paragraphs are too verbose and not necessary.
These explanations are more suitable as comments in the code than in the RFC.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IMO, the algorithm should discussed in RFC stage.
|
@Connor1996 Try to get another approval :) |
|
PTAL @zhangjinpeng1987 |
Hoverbear
approved these changes
Dec 20, 2018
Hoverbear
force-pushed
the
Connor1996-patch-1
branch
from
ac2e9aa
to
0109896
Compare
Hoverbear
force-pushed
the
Connor1996-patch-1
branch
from
0109896
to
dec91b9
Compare
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.
No description provided.