-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 411
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
Pipeline: Support pipeline table scan fullstack part 1 #7225
Pipeline: Support pipeline table scan fullstack part 1 #7225
Conversation
…ort_pipeline_table_scan_fullstack
…ort_pipeline_table_scan_fullstack
…ort_pipeline_table_scan_fullstack
…ort_pipeline_table_scan_fullstack
[REVIEW NOTIFICATION] This pull request has been approved by:
To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review. |
/run-all-tests |
…ort_pipeline_table_scan_fullstack
de73ae5
to
e6314d5
Compare
/run-all-tests |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
And use failpoint region_exception_after_read_from_storage_some_error
and region_exception_after_read_from_storage_all_error
to add test for pipeline remote read.
Seems that tiflash/dbms/src/Flash/executeQuery.cpp Lines 169 to 170 in ef2e8e9
Support non-test-mode and forbid Disagg mode. Others LGTM |
dbms/src/DataStreams/GeneratedColumnPlaceHolderTransformAction.h
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…ort_pipeline_table_scan_fullstack
/run-all-tests |
const auto & col_index = std::get<0>(ele); | ||
const auto & col_name = std::get<1>(ele); | ||
const auto & data_type = std::get<2>(ele); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
const auto & col_index = std::get<0>(ele); | |
const auto & col_name = std::get<1>(ele); | |
const auto & data_type = std::get<2>(ele); | |
constexpr int col_index_pos = 1; | |
constexpr int col_name_pos = 2; | |
constexpr int data_type_pos = 3; | |
const auto & col_index = std::get<col_index_pos>(ele); | |
const auto & col_name = std::get<col_name_pos>(ele); | |
const auto & data_type = std::get<data_type_pos>(ele); |
Maybe get tuple's value with meaningful const name is better
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe get tuple's value with meaningful const name is better
Only use for 1 time. I will keep it
// Validation check. | ||
for (size_t i = 1; i < generated_column_infos.size(); ++i) | ||
{ | ||
RUNTIME_CHECK(std::get<0>(generated_column_infos[i]) > std::get<0>(generated_column_infos[i - 1])); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ditto
{ | ||
assert(root_node); | ||
PipelineBuilder builder{log->identifier()}; | ||
root_node->buildPipeline(builder); | ||
root_node->buildPipeline(builder, context, exec_status); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe we can define a helper struct to contain buildPipeline parameters?
such as:
struct buildPipelineParams {
PipelineExecutorStatus exec_status;
Context * context;
};
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe we can define a helper struct to contain buildPipeline parameters? such as:
struct buildPipelineParams { PipelineExecutorStatus exec_status; Context * context; };
Not necessary? Since so many place can use struct as Param, IMHO only if the api is not stable and need to change frequently, we can use struct to hold all the param
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
@xzhangxian1008: Thanks for your review. The bot only counts approvals from reviewers and higher roles in list, but you're still welcome to leave your comments. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository. |
/merge |
@ywqzzy: It seems you want to merge this PR, I will help you trigger all the tests: /run-all-tests You only need to trigger If you have any questions about the PR merge process, please refer to pr process. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository. |
/merge cancel |
/merge |
@ywqzzy: It seems you want to merge this PR, I will help you trigger all the tests: /run-all-tests You only need to trigger If you have any questions about the PR merge process, please refer to pr process. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository. |
This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge. Commit hash: 76956e0
|
/run-unit-tests |
What problem does this PR solve?
Issue Number: ref #6518
Problem Summary:
What is changed and how it works?
Check List
Tests
Side effects
Documentation
Release note