-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 67
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
"zed query" not returning results in key order for "non-ts" Pool #2749
Labels
bug
Something isn't working
Comments
mccanne
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 20, 2021
mccanne
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 20, 2021
mccanne
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 21, 2021
brim-bot
pushed a commit
to brimdata/brimcap
that referenced
this issue
May 21, 2021
…key" by mccanne This is an auto-generated commit with a Zed dependency update. The Zed PR brimdata/super#2752, authored by @mccanne, has been merged. fix bug in lake scan when merging by non-ts pool key closes brimdata/super#2749
brim-bot
pushed a commit
to brimdata/brimcap
that referenced
this issue
May 21, 2021
…key" by mccanne This is an auto-generated commit with a Zed dependency update. The Zed PR brimdata/super#2752, authored by @mccanne, has been merged. fix bug in lake scan when merging by non-ts pool key closes brimdata/super#2749
brim-bot
pushed a commit
to brimdata/zui
that referenced
this issue
May 21, 2021
…key" by mccanne This is an auto-generated commit with a Zed dependency update. The Zed PR brimdata/super#2752, authored by @mccanne, has been merged. fix bug in lake scan when merging by non-ts pool key closes brimdata/super#2749
Verified in Zed commit 0440b15. Now when I create the Pool with the ascending-order
Indeed, a
Thanks @mccanne! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Repro is with Zed commit b13ac39 and the Zeek zed-sample-data.
While trying to verify the changes linked to #2482, my experience regarding the "ordered" pool key did not match my expectations as a user. Here I create a Pool keyed off the
ip
-typedid.resp_h
field rather than thetime
-typedts
field that we're more accustomed to.Given that my
zed lake create
set an expectation that my Pool was ordered byid.resp_h
in ascending order, I was expecting that a straightzed lake query
with no explicitsort
would show me the data in that ascending order. Indeed, looking at the initial output, it gives me that impression, but it eventually goes "back" to lower values again.Indeed, if I ask the Pool to be explicitly sorted, we see a whole bunch of "lower" addresses returned first.
However, this effect does not appear when the Pool is keyed off
ts
as we're accustomed to.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: