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

Pick some pr to branch 21 #42279 #44164 #44369

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 22, 2024

Conversation

seawinde
Copy link
Contributor

What problem does this PR solve?

3a5c0fd
#42279

7aec6ff
#44164

Issue Number: close #xxx

Related PR: #xxx

Problem Summary:

Release note

None

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

seawinde and others added 2 commits November 21, 2024 11:09
…sure the same test code in different version (apache#42279)

Auto calc the value of sync_cbo_rewrite variable to make sure the same
test code in different version.
Because the query rewrite by mv code is a little different from 2.1 to
3.0 and master.
But should keep same regression test code in different version.
So add the methoed `enable_sync_mv_cost_based_rewrite` to get
`enable_sync_mv_cost_based_rewrite` session variable, then decide to
regression test logic by the variable auto.
…zed view (apache#44164)

Problem Summary:

When materialized view is rewritten, it would use the mv metadata.
Should try to get read lock before use these metadata. or it would cause
error.
Such as mv def is as following

CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW mv1
        BUILD IMMEDIATE REFRESH COMPLETE ON MANUAL
        DISTRIBUTED BY RANDOM BUCKETS 2
        PROPERTIES ('replication_num' = '1')
        AS
          select
              o_orderdate,
              o_shippriority,
              o_comment,
              o.o_code as o_o_code,
              l_orderkey,
              l_partkey,
              l.o_code as l_o_code
            from
              orders_same_col o left
              join lineitem_same_col l on l_orderkey = o_orderkey
              left join partsupp on ps_partkey = l_partkey and l_suppkey = ps_suppkey;

When handling transparent rewriting, a MV scan plan is used for the
transparent rewrite. During the initialization of the scan plan, the
partitions of the table are retrieved, so it is necessary to attempt to
acquire a read lock on the table during initialization. If the read lock
is not acquired, subsequent operations may add or delete partitions, and
in the later processing of table partitions, calling get Partition may
not retrieve the corresponding partition, leading to data errors.
@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?

@seawinde
Copy link
Contributor Author

run buildall

@seawinde
Copy link
Contributor Author

run buildall

@seawinde seawinde changed the title Pick some pr to branch 21 Pick some pr to branch 21 #42279 #44164 Nov 22, 2024
@yiguolei yiguolei merged commit 5e9bda6 into apache:branch-2.1 Nov 22, 2024
21 of 23 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants