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

release-22.1: sql: turn off plan sampling by default #88420

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 22, 2022

Conversation

maryliag
Copy link
Contributor

Backport 1/1 commits from #88343.

/cc @cockroachdb/release


Previously, we were sampling plans for fingerprints and saving to statement_statistics tables. Now that we are saving plan hash and plan gist (that allow us to decode back to the plan) we are no longer using the sampled plan anywhere. Since this is a heavy opperation, we are turning it off by default, but changing the default value of sql.metrics.statement_details.plan_collection.enabled to false.
If we don't receive feedback about turning it back on, we can remove this sampling entirely.

Partially addresses #77944

Release note (sql change): Change the default value of sql.metrics.statement_details.plan_collection.enabled to false, since we no longer use this information
anywhere.


Release justification: low risk, high benefit change

Previously, we were sampling plans for fingerprints
and saving to statement_statistics tables. Now that
we are saving plan hash and plan gist (that allow us
to decode back to the plan) we are no longer using the
sampled plan anywhere. Since this is a heavy opperation,
we are turning it off by default, but changing the default
value of `sql.metrics.statement_details.plan_collection.enabled`
to `false`.
If we don't receive feedback about turning it back on,
we can remove this sampling entirely.

Partially addresses cockroachdb#77944

Release note (sql change): Change the default value of
`sql.metrics.statement_details.plan_collection.enabled`
to false, since we no longer use this information
anywhere.
@maryliag maryliag requested review from yuzefovich and a team September 21, 2022 23:31
@maryliag maryliag requested a review from a team as a code owner September 21, 2022 23:31
@maryliag maryliag requested a review from a team September 21, 2022 23:31
@blathers-crl
Copy link

blathers-crl bot commented Sep 21, 2022

Thanks for opening a backport.

Please check the backport criteria before merging:

  • Patches should only be created for serious issues or test-only changes.
  • Patches should not break backwards-compatibility.
  • Patches should change as little code as possible.
  • Patches should not change on-disk formats or node communication protocols.
  • Patches should not add new functionality.
  • Patches must not add, edit, or otherwise modify cluster versions; or add version gates.
If some of the basic criteria cannot be satisfied, ensure that the exceptional criteria are satisfied within.
  • There is a high priority need for the functionality that cannot wait until the next release and is difficult to address in another way.
  • The new functionality is additive-only and only runs for clusters which have specifically “opted in” to it (e.g. by a cluster setting).
  • New code is protected by a conditional check that is trivial to verify and ensures that it only runs for opt-in clusters.
  • The PM and TL on the team that owns the changed code have signed off that the change obeys the above rules.

Add a brief release justification to the body of your PR to justify this backport.

Some other things to consider:

  • What did we do to ensure that a user that doesn’t know & care about this backport, has no idea that it happened?
  • Will this work in a cluster of mixed patch versions? Did we test that?
  • If a user upgrades a patch version, uses this feature, and then downgrades, what happens?

@maryliag maryliag removed request for a team September 21, 2022 23:31
@cockroach-teamcity
Copy link
Member

This change is Reviewable

Copy link
Member

@yuzefovich yuzefovich left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

:lgtm:

Reviewed 8 of 8 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: :shipit: complete! 1 of 0 LGTMs obtained (waiting on @maryliag)

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