[SPARK-47278][BUILD] Upgrade rocksdbjni to 8.11.3 #45365
Closed
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
Thank you, @LuciferYang . Is it ready? |
LuciferYang
changed the title
|
@dongjoon-hyun Let's run another two or three rounds of tests |
yaooqinn
approved these changes
Mar 7, 2024
|
Merged to master. Thank you @LuciferYang @dongjoon-hyun |
|
Thanks @yaooqinn @dongjoon-hyun |
jpcorreia99
pushed a commit
to jpcorreia99/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 12, 2024
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This pr aims to upgrade rocksdbjni from 8.8.1 to 8.11.3. ### Why are the changes needed? The new version bring some bug fixes: - Fix a corner case with auto_readahead_size where Prev Operation returns NOT SUPPORTED error when scans direction is changed from forward to backward. - Avoid destroying the periodic task scheduler's default timer in order to prevent static destruction order issues. - Fix double counting of BYTES_WRITTEN ticker when doing writes with transactions. - Fix a WRITE_STALL counter that was reporting wrong value in few cases. - A lookup by MultiGet in a TieredCache that goes to the local flash cache and finishes with very low latency, i.e before the subsequent call to WaitAll, is ignored, resulting in a false negative and a memory leak. - Fix bug in auto_readahead_size that combined with IndexType::kBinarySearchWithFirstKey + fails or iterator lands at a wrong key - Fixed some cases in which DB file corruption was detected but ignored on creating a backup with BackupEngine. - Fix bugs where rocksdb.blobdb.blob.file.synced includes blob files failed to get synced and rocksdb.blobdb.blob.file.bytes.written includes blob bytes failed to get written. - Fixed a possible memory leak or crash on a failure (such as I/O error) in automatic atomic flush of multiple column families. - Fixed some cases of in-memory data corruption using mmap reads with BackupEngine, sst_dump, or ldb. - Fixed issues with experimental preclude_last_level_data_seconds option that could interfere with expected data tiering. - Fixed the handling of the edge case when all existing blob files become unreferenced. Such files are now correctly deleted. The full release notes as follows: - https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/releases/tag/v8.9.1 - https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/releases/tag/v8.10.0 - https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/releases/tag/v8.11.3 ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No ### How was this patch tested? Pass GitHub Actions ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No Closes apache#45365 from LuciferYang/rocksdbjni-8.11.3. Lead-authored-by: yangjie01 <yangjie01@baidu.com> Co-authored-by: YangJie <yangjie01@baidu.com> Signed-off-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This pr aims to upgrade rocksdbjni from 8.8.1 to 8.11.3.
Why are the changes needed?
The new version bring some bug fixes:
The full release notes as follows:
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
Pass GitHub Actions
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No