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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[planner bugfix] make sure queries with more than 64 tables work #11817

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

[planner bugfix] make sure queries with more than 64 tables work #11817

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

systay
Copy link
Collaborator

@systay systay commented Nov 25, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Description

If a query contains more than 64 tables, the bitset we use to keep track of tables goes from being just a uint64 to be a slice of uint64 values. Once that happens, we can't compare bitsets using = and instead must use the Equals method on the TableSet.

Related Issue(s)

Fixes #11797
Fixes #11805

Checklist

  • "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported
  • Tests were added or are not required
  • Documentation was added or is not required

@systay
make sure planner works well with more than 64 tables
9490976 
Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <andres@planetscale.com>
@vitess-bot
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Nov 25, 2022

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • If this is a change that users need to know about, please apply the release notes (needs details) label so that merging is blocked unless the summary release notes document is included.

If a new flag is being introduced:

  • Is it really necessary to add this flag?
  • Flag names should be clear and intuitive (as far as possible)
  • Help text should be descriptive.
  • Flag names should use dashes (-) as word separators rather than underscores (_).

If a workflow is added or modified:

  • Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
  • If the workflow should be required, the maintainer team should be notified.

Bug fixes

  • There should be at least one unit or end-to-end test.
  • The Pull Request description should include a link to an issue that describes the bug.

Non-trivial changes

  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.

New/Existing features

  • Should be documented, either by modifying the existing documentation or creating new documentation.
  • New features should have a link to a feature request issue or an RFC that documents the use cases, corner cases and test cases.

Backward compatibility

  • Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
  • Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
  • vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.
  • RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
  • If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from VTop, if used there.

arthurschreiber
arthurschreiber reviewed Nov 25, 2022
View reviewed changes
go/vt/vtgate/planbuilder/operators/querygraph.go Outdated
@@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ func (qg *QueryGraph) collectPredicate(ctx *plancontext.PlanningContext, predica

func (qg *QueryGraph) addToSingleTable(table semantics.TableSet, predicate sqlparser.Expr) bool {
for _, t := range qg.Tables {
if table == t.ID {
if table.Equals(t.ID) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

✨

@systay systay marked this pull request as draft November 25, 2022 10:23
@systay
Copy link
Collaborator Author

systay commented Nov 25, 2022

found more issues around TableSet comparisons. will mark as ready for review when we have a fix for those

@vmg
semantics: use a bitset
b60b931 
Signed-off-by: Vicent Marti <vmg@strn.cat>
@vmg
subquery: remove superfluous walk
f7229f8 
Signed-off-by: Vicent Marti <vmg@strn.cat>
@vmg
bitsets: cleanup
80d9020 
Signed-off-by: Vicent Marti <vmg@strn.cat>
@vmg vmg mentioned this pull request Nov 25, 2022
Merged
@systay systay closed this Nov 25, 2022
@vitess-bot
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Nov 25, 2022

I was unable to backport this Pull Request to the following branches: release-15.0.

@rsajwani rsajwani mentioned this pull request Nov 26, 2022
Closed
24 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@arthurschreiber arthurschreiber arthurschreiber approved these changes

@harshit-gangal harshit-gangal Awaiting requested review from harshit-gangal harshit-gangal is a code owner

@frouioui frouioui Awaiting requested review from frouioui frouioui is a code owner

@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 Awaiting requested review from GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 is a code owner

@mattlord mattlord Awaiting requested review from mattlord mattlord will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for review mattlord is a code owner

@deepthi deepthi Awaiting requested review from deepthi deepthi will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for review deepthi is a code owner

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Component: Query Serving Type: Bug
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Bug Report: bug: not supported pushWeightStringForDistinct on *planbuilder.limit
4 participants
@systay @arthurschreiber @GuptaManan100 @vmg