Phoenix 6219 GlobalIndexChecker doesn't work for SingleCell indexes#993
Closed
gokceni wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Phoenix 6219 GlobalIndexChecker doesn't work for SingleCell indexes#993gokceni wants to merge 1 commit into
gokceni wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
gokceni
changed the title
Contributor
Author
tkhurana
reviewed
Dec 3, 2020
| private final boolean mutable; | ||
| private final boolean useSnapshot; | ||
|
|
||
| private static final Logger LOGGER = LoggerFactory.getLogger(IndexExtendedIT.class); |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This object is not being used
tkhurana
reviewed
Dec 3, 2020
| @@ -326,10 +326,10 @@ private void repairIndexRows(byte[] indexRowKey, long ts, List<Cell> row) throws | |||
| buildIndexScan.setAttribute(BaseScannerRegionObserver.REBUILD_INDEXES, TRUE_BYTES); | |||
| buildIndexScan.setAttribute(BaseScannerRegionObserver.SKIP_REGION_BOUNDARY_CHECK, Bytes.toBytes(true)); | |||
| // Scan only columns included in the index table plus the empty column | |||
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this comment still applicable ?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, it is. The difference is that in getAllColumns, you get index cols. The getAllColumnsForDataTable, you get the mapping columns in data table. For example: in index there is Col1 but in hbase it is in a cell with others with column qualifier:1. But in data table it is in its own cell with col qualifier Col1.
tkhurana
reviewed
Dec 3, 2020
| if (!dataTable.isTransactional() | ||
| || !dataTable.getTransactionProvider().getTransactionProvider().isUnsupported(Feature.MAINTAIN_LOCAL_INDEX_ON_SERVER)) { | ||
| indexesItr = maintainedLocalIndexes(indexes.iterator()); | ||
| indexesItr = maintainedLocalOrGlobalIndexesWithoutMatchingStorageScheme(dataTable, indexes.iterator()); |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't this still be maintainedLocalIndexes since it is called inside if (onlyLocalIndexex)
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unfortunately onlyLocalIndexes variable name is misleading. So it is immutableIndexes or transactional indexes
boolean onlyLocalIndexes = dataTable.isImmutableRows() || dataTable.isTransactional();
gjacoby126
requested changes
Dec 3, 2020
| conn.commit(); | ||
|
|
||
| stmt.execute(String.format("CREATE " + (localIndex ? "LOCAL" : "") + " INDEX %s ON %s (UPPER(NAME, 'en_US')) ASYNC ", indexTableName,dataTableFullName)); | ||
| stmt.execute(String.format("CREATE " + (localIndex ? "LOCAL" : "") + " INDEX %s ON %s (UPPER(NAME, 'en_US')) ASYNC " + this.indexDDLOptions, indexTableName,dataTableFullName)); |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: can use String.format parameter rather than concatenating indexDDLOptions
|
|
||
| stmt.execute( | ||
| String.format("CREATE INDEX %s ON %s (UPPER(NAME, 'en_US')) ", indexName, | ||
| String.format("CREATE INDEX %s ON %s (UPPER(NAME, 'en_US')) " + this.indexDDLOptions, indexName, |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ditto, String.format vs concatenation
| conn.commit(); | ||
| String | ||
| sql = | ||
| "UPSERT /*+ NO_INDEX */ INTO " + idxName + "(\":PK1\",\":INT_PK\",\"0:V1\",\"0:V2\",\"0:V4\") SELECT /*+ NO_INDEX */ PK1,INT_PK, V1, V2,V4 FROM " |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does a NO_INDEX hint in an upsert clause do anything?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I copy pasted this from PostIndexDDLCompilerTest. I think it is valid but not mean much since this is already the index. Let me remove it
| conn.commit(); | ||
| String | ||
| sql = | ||
| "UPSERT /*+ NO_INDEX */ INTO " + idxName + "(\":PK1\",\":INT_PK\",\"0:V1\",\"0:V2\",\"0:V4\") SELECT /*+ NO_INDEX */ PK1,INT_PK, V1, V2,V4 FROM " |
Contributor
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Contributor
Author
|
Thanks @gjacoby126 for the review! I added one more test to SingleCellIndexIT called testMultipleColumnFamilies |
Contributor
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Contributor
Author
|
Merged |
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 free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 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.
No description provided.