Skip to content

branch-4.1: [fix](cloud) Recycle empty rowsets without resource id #64630 - #64643

Merged
yiguolei merged 1 commit into
branch-4.1from
auto-pick-64630-branch-4.1
Jun 20, 2026
Merged

branch-4.1: [fix](cloud) Recycle empty rowsets without resource id #64630#64643
yiguolei merged 1 commit into
branch-4.1from
auto-pick-64630-branch-4.1

Conversation

@github-actions

@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot commented Jun 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Cherry-picked from #64630

@liaoxin01Your Name
[fix](cloud) Recycle empty rowsets without resource id (#64630)
cc30c75
When recycling a dropped tablet, empty rowsets may have `num_segments ==
0` and an empty `resource_id`. The protobuf field can be explicitly set
to an empty string, so `has_resource_id()` returns true. The recycler
then attempts to look up an accessor for the empty ID, fails the recycle
round, and repeatedly leaves the dropped tablet/index metadata behind.
This PR skips object deletion for every rowset with zero segments
because it has no segment objects to remove. Rowsets with segments still
require a non-empty resource ID.
@github-actions
github-actionsBot requested a review from yiguolei as a code ownerJune 18, 2026 12:09
@hello-stephen

hello-stephen commented Jun 18, 2026

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?

@hello-stephen

hello-stephen commented Jun 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

run buildall

@hello-stephen

hello-stephen commented Jun 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Cloud UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 100.00% (6/6) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

CategoryCoverage
Function Coverage77.24% (1877/2430)
Line Coverage64.33% (33746/52456)
Region Coverage64.81% (17379/26814)
Branch Coverage53.94% (9287/17216)

@yiguolei
yiguolei merged commit 5648627 into branch-4.1Jun 20, 2026
28 of 31 checks passed
@morningman
morningman deleted the auto-pick-64630-branch-4.1 branch July 8, 2026 14:10
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@yiguoleiyiguoleiyiguolei 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.

3 participants

@hello-stephen@yiguolei@liaoxin01