Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
PHOENIX-6437: Parent-Child Delete marker should get replicated via Sy… - #1219
Merged
Conversation
…stemCatalogWALEntryFilter
ankitjain64
commented
May 3, 2021
ContributorAuthor
With this PR we are fixing the bug where delete markers for parent-child link rows do not get replicated via SystemCatalogWalEntry Filter for tenant views. |
xcangCRM
reviewed
May 4, 2021
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
| if (CellUtil.matchingValue(cell, CHILD_TABLE_BYTES)) { | ||
| // Check if cell is of type LINK_TYPE with value 4 or DeleteFamily | ||
| if ((isChildLink && CellUtil.matchingValue(cell, CHILD_TABLE_BYTES)) || | ||
| CellUtil.isDeleteFamily(cell) ) { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this logic means you will replicate whenever it's a DeleteFamily cell, regardless of childlink or not. Is this the intention?
ContributorAuthor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To replicate a delete marker we are using two checks.
- The cell is of type
DeleteFamily. - The length for
COLUMN_NAMEis greater than0. (For tenant views column_name is populated with tenant_id which is not the case for global views.)
One may argue that the above two checks are also true for delete markers of column rows and we may over-replicate those rows. But, we are avoiding all those scenarios by doing the above filtering only for the mutations belonging to SYSTEM.CHILD_LINK table. With 4.15+ we are assured that SYSTEM.CHILD_LINK table only stores parent-child linking rows with LINK_TYPE=4, so the only thing we need to differentiate here is parent-child link delete markers for tenant vs non-tenant view. Let me know if you still feel we are missing any scenario. Thanks
stoty
commented
May 4, 2021
Contributor
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
gjacoby126
approved these changes
May 4, 2021
gjacoby126
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1, thanks @ankitjain64
gjacoby126 pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 6, 2021
#1219) * PHOENIX-6437: Parent-Child Delete marker should get replicated via SystemCatalogWALEntryFilter Co-authored-by: Ankit Jain <jainankit@salesforce.com>
swaroopak pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 21, 2021
#1219) * PHOENIX-6437: Parent-Child Delete marker should get replicated via SystemCatalogWALEntryFilter Co-authored-by: Ankit Jain <jainankit@salesforce.com>
jpisaac pushed a commit
to jpisaac/phoenix
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 10, 2022
apache#1219) (apache#650) * PHOENIX-6437: Parent-Child Delete marker should get replicated via SystemCatalogWALEntryFilter
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
…stemCatalogWALEntryFilter