Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
[opt](nerieds) PhysicalOlapScan and PhysicalFileScan should print its id in plan - #62509
Conversation
englefly
commented
Apr 15, 2026
run buildall |
Thearas
commented
Apr 15, 2026
Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris. Please clearly describe your PR:
|
hello-stephen
commented
Apr 15, 2026
FE UT Coverage ReportIncrement line coverage |
hello-stephen
commented
Apr 15, 2026
FE Regression Coverage ReportIncrement line coverage |
englefly
commented
Apr 16, 2026
/review |
englefly
commented
Apr 16, 2026
/build.sh |
englefly
commented
Apr 16, 2026
run buildall |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Summary
Requesting changes for one blocking regression and one missed parallel path.
regression-test/suites/query_p0/stats/partitionRowCount.groovynow hardcodes a statement-localAbstractPlan.id(19). That id comes fromStatementContext.getNextObjectId()/StatementScopeIdGenerator.newObjectId(), so unrelated optimizer rewrites can renumber the scan and break the case without any semantic plan change.PhysicalHudiScanstill overridestoString()and is created viaLogicalHudiScanToPhysicalHudiScan, so the Hudi file-scan path still does not print an id.
Critical Checkpoints
- Goal of task: Partially achieved.
PhysicalOlapScanand basePhysicalFileScannow printAbstractPlan.id, butPhysicalHudiScandoes not. The added regression does not prove the behavior robustly because it hardcodes a statement-local id. - Small and focused: Yes.
- Concurrency: Not applicable; these changes only affect explain-string formatting.
- Lifecycle/static init: Not applicable.
- Config changes: None.
- Compatibility: User-visible physical-plan explain text changes; acceptable if intentional, but tests must avoid brittle ids.
- Parallel code paths: Not fully covered;
PhysicalHudiScanremains on the old format. - Special conditions/comments: None.
- Test coverage: Insufficient. The only updated regression is brittle, and there is no coverage for the Hudi path.
- Test result changes: The modified expectation is not stable.
- Observability: Table name is still present in the payload, so explain readability is mostly preserved.
- Transaction/persistence/data writes/FE-BE variable passing: Not applicable.
- Performance: No meaningful impact.
- Other issues: None beyond the above.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
hello-stephen
commented
Apr 16, 2026
FE Regression Coverage ReportIncrement line coverage |
englefly
commented
Apr 17, 2026
run buildall |
englefly
commented
Apr 17, 2026
run buildall |
hello-stephen
commented
Apr 17, 2026
FE Regression Coverage ReportIncrement line coverage |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
…d print its id in plan (#62509) (#63538) pick #62576 ### What problem does this PR solve? Issue Number: close #xxx Related PR: #xxx Problem Summary: ### Release note None ### Check List (For Author) - Test <!-- At least one of them must be included. --> - [ ] 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 <!-- Add your reason? --> - Behavior changed: - [ ] No. - [ ] Yes. <!-- Explain the behavior change --> - Does this need documentation? - [ ] No. - [ ] Yes. <!-- Add document PR link here. eg: apache/doris-website#1214 --> ### Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR) - [ ] Confirm the release note - [ ] Confirm test cases - [ ] Confirm document - [ ] Add branch pick label <!-- Add branch pick label that this PR should merge into -->
What problem does this PR solve?
Issue Number: close #xxx
Related PR: #xxx
Problem Summary:
Release note
None
Check List (For Author)
Test
Behavior changed:
Does this need documentation?
Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR)