Skip to content

branch-4.1: [fix](filecache) add async lru update machanism and fix partial hit in cache reader(pick#61083) - #64234

Merged
yiguolei merged 3 commits into
apache:branch-4.1from
freemandealer:pick-branch-4.1-pr-61083
Jun 9, 2026
Merged

branch-4.1: [fix](filecache) add async lru update machanism and fix partial hit in cache reader(pick#61083)#64234
yiguolei merged 3 commits into
apache:branch-4.1from
freemandealer:pick-branch-4.1-pr-61083

Conversation

@freemandealer

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Original PR: #61083
Picked to: branch-4.1
Pick branch: freemandealer:pick-branch-4.1-pr-61083

Validation:

  • git diff --check
  • build-support/check-format.sh with clang-format 16

Notes:
The first two original commits were already present in branch-4.1 and were skipped as empty; picked the remaining commits.

### What problem does this PR solve?
Issue Number: close #xxx
Related PR: #xxx
Problem Summary: The async cache lock wait BE UT compared aggregate timing numbers, which is sensitive to scheduler noise on busy hosts. Stabilize the test by checking the deterministic async LRU deferral behavior and expose the pending LRU update size through an unsafe-named cache inspection API.
### Release note
None
### Check List (For Author)
- Test: Unit Test
- `DORIS_TOOLCHAIN=clang DISABLE_BE_JAVA_EXTENSIONS=ON ENABLE_INJECTION_POINT=ON ENABLE_CACHE_LOCK_DEBUG=0 ENABLE_PCH=0 sh run-be-ut.sh --run --filter=CachedRemoteFileReaderLockWaitTest.*`
- Behavior changed: No
- Does this need documentation: No
Picked from: apache#61083
Signed-off-by: zhengyu <zhangzhengyu@selectdb.com>
Picked from: apache#61083
@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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?

@freemandealer

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

run buildall

@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

BE Regression && UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 100% (0/0) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

CategoryCoverage
Function Coverage71.73% (26559/37028)
Line Coverage54.86% (282289/514535)
Region Coverage52.40% (235560/449581)
Branch Coverage53.56% (101722/189932)

@yiguolei

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

skip buildall

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested.

@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot added approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. reviewed labels Jun 9, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

PR approved by anyone and no changes requested.

@yiguolei
yiguolei merged commit ed6e36d into apache:branch-4.1Jun 9, 2026
32 of 34 checks passed
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

approvedIndicates a PR has been approved by one committer.reviewed

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@freemandealer@hello-stephen@yiguolei