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

branch-3.0: [Fix](cloud-mow) Fix dup key problem due to calculating delete bitmaps for incremental rowsets based on wrong historical rowsets during SC #49350 #49364

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 24, 2025
Merged

branch-3.0: [Fix](cloud-mow) Fix dup key problem due to calculating delete bitmaps for incremental rowsets based on wrong historical rowsets during SC #49350 #49364

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 24, 2025

Conversation

github-actions[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

Cherry-picked from #49350

@bobhan1
[Fix](cloud-mow) Fix dup key problem due to calculating delete bitmap…
0bd2a89 
…s for incremental rowsets based on wrong historical rowsets during SC (#49350)

### What problem does this PR solve?

When calculating delete bitmaps for incremental rowsets during schema
change double write phase, `sync_rowsets` on tmp_tablet may override
local converted historical rowsets with rowsets on new tablet. But these
rowsets will be removed when commit sc job.
This PR re-add converted rowsets after `sync_rowsets` to avoid the
problem
@github-actions github-actions bot requested a review from dataroaring as a code owner March 22, 2025 08:59
@Thearas
Copy link
Contributor

Thearas commented Mar 22, 2025

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?

@dataroaring dataroaring reopened this Mar 22, 2025
@Thearas
Copy link
Contributor

Thearas commented Mar 22, 2025

run buildall

@bobhan1
Copy link
Contributor

bobhan1 commented Mar 22, 2025

run beut

@doris-robot
Copy link

BE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 0.00% (0/4) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category Coverage
Function Coverage 38.89% (10172/26157)
Line Coverage 30.31% (86768/286273)
Region Coverage 29.35% (44573/151848)
Branch Coverage 25.88% (22672/87618)

dataroaring
dataroaring approved these changes Mar 24, 2025
View reviewed changes
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 05a1996 into branch-3.0 Mar 24, 2025
21 of 24 checks passed
@github-actions github-actions bot deleted the auto-pick-49350-branch-3.0 branch March 24, 2025 03:05
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@dataroaring dataroaring dataroaring approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@Thearas @bobhan1 @doris-robot @dataroaring