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

[Fix](auto-increment) Fix duplicate auto-increment column value problem #43774

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Nov 14, 2024

Conversation

bobhan1
Copy link
Contributor

@bobhan1 bobhan1 commented Nov 12, 2024

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #xxx

Related PR: #xxx

Problem Summary:

Result<int64_t> AutoIncIDBuffer::_fetch_ids_from_fe(size_t length) {
    // ...
    return _rpc_status;
}

should be

Result<int64_t> AutoIncIDBuffer::_fetch_ids_from_fe(size_t length) {
    // ...
    return ResultError(_rpc_status);
}

Otherwise, the returned Result<int64_t>'s m_has_val will be true, then AutoIncIDBuffer::_launch_async_fetch_task() will wrongly add an auto-increment range [0, length) to _buffers which will cause duplicate value problem.

Release note

Fix duplicate auto-increment column value problem in some situations.

Check List (For Author)

  • Test

    • Regression test
    • Unit Test
    • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
    • No need to test or manual test. Explain why:
      • This is a refactor/code format and no logic has been changed.
      • Previous test can cover this change.
      • No code files have been changed.
      • Other reason
  • Behavior changed:

    • No.
    • Yes.
  • Does this need documentation?

    • No.
    • Yes.

Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR)

  • Confirm the release note
  • Confirm test cases
  • Confirm document
  • Add branch pick label

Sorry, something went wrong.

@doris-robot
Copy link

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

  1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
  2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
  3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
  4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
  5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

@bobhan1
Copy link
Contributor Author

bobhan1 commented Nov 12, 2024

run buildall

Copy link
Contributor

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍"

Copy link
Contributor

@zhannngchen zhannngchen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@github-actions github-actions bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. label Nov 12, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested.

Copy link
Contributor

PR approved by anyone and no changes requested.

@bobhan1
Copy link
Contributor Author

bobhan1 commented Nov 12, 2024

run cloud_p0

Copy link
Contributor

@dataroaring dataroaring left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@dataroaring
Copy link
Contributor

run buildall

Copy link
Contributor

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍"

@bobhan1
Copy link
Contributor Author

bobhan1 commented Nov 13, 2024

run beut

@bobhan1
Copy link
Contributor Author

bobhan1 commented Nov 13, 2024

run buildall

Copy link
Contributor

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍"

@bobhan1
Copy link
Contributor Author

bobhan1 commented Nov 13, 2024

run buildall

Copy link
Contributor

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍"

@bobhan1
Copy link
Contributor Author

bobhan1 commented Nov 14, 2024

run buildall

Copy link
Contributor

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍"

@bobhan1
Copy link
Contributor Author

bobhan1 commented Nov 14, 2024

run buildall

Copy link
Contributor

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍"

@doris-robot
Copy link

TeamCity be ut coverage result:
Function Coverage: 37.94% (9885/26056)
Line Coverage: 29.12% (82580/283542)
Region Coverage: 28.26% (42449/150228)
Branch Coverage: 24.84% (21532/86678)
Coverage Report: http://coverage.selectdb-in.cc/coverage/ca8de90d6f76cfa62881d94729f1eb90bf4f14d1_ca8de90d6f76cfa62881d94729f1eb90bf4f14d1/report/index.html

@bobhan1
Copy link
Contributor Author

bobhan1 commented Nov 14, 2024

run p0

Copy link
Contributor

@dataroaring dataroaring left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@dataroaring dataroaring merged commit b4a7240 into apache:master Nov 14, 2024
24 of 26 checks passed
github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 14, 2024
…em (#43774)

```cpp
Result<int64_t> AutoIncIDBuffer::_fetch_ids_from_fe(size_t length) {
    // ...
    return _rpc_status;
}
```
should be
```cpp
Result<int64_t> AutoIncIDBuffer::_fetch_ids_from_fe(size_t length) {
    // ...
    return ResultError(_rpc_status);
}
```
Otherwise, the returned `Result<int64_t>`'s `m_has_val` will be `true`,
then `AutoIncIDBuffer::_launch_async_fetch_task()` will wrongly add an
auto-increment range [0, length) to `_buffers` which will cause
duplicate value problem.

### Release note

Fix duplicate auto-increment column value problem in some situations.
github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 14, 2024
…em (#43774)

```cpp
Result<int64_t> AutoIncIDBuffer::_fetch_ids_from_fe(size_t length) {
    // ...
    return _rpc_status;
}
```
should be
```cpp
Result<int64_t> AutoIncIDBuffer::_fetch_ids_from_fe(size_t length) {
    // ...
    return ResultError(_rpc_status);
}
```
Otherwise, the returned `Result<int64_t>`'s `m_has_val` will be `true`,
then `AutoIncIDBuffer::_launch_async_fetch_task()` will wrongly add an
auto-increment range [0, length) to `_buffers` which will cause
duplicate value problem.

### Release note

Fix duplicate auto-increment column value problem in some situations.
dataroaring pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 15, 2024

Verified

This commit was created on GitHub.com and signed with GitHub’s verified signature.
… value problem #43774 (#43983)

Cherry-picked from #43774

Co-authored-by: bobhan1 <[email protected]>
yiguolei pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 16, 2024

Verified

This commit was created on GitHub.com and signed with GitHub’s verified signature.
… value problem #43774 (#43984)

Cherry-picked from #43774

Co-authored-by: bobhan1 <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. dev/2.1.8-merged dev/3.0.3-merged p0_w reviewed
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants