Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

HPCC-22869 Lightweight join must always ensure sides are ungrouped #13012

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 25, 2019

Conversation

jakesmith
Copy link
Member

@jakesmith jakesmith commented Sep 20, 2019

Signed-off-by: Jake Smith jake.smith@lexisnexisrisk.com

Type of change:

  • This change is a bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue).
  • This change is a new feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality).
  • This change improves the code (refactor or other change that does not change the functionality)
  • This change fixes warnings (the fix does not alter the functionality or the generated code)
  • This change is a breaking change (fix or feature that will cause existing behavior to change).
  • This change alters the query API (existing queries will have to be recompiled)

Checklist:

  • My code follows the code style of this project.
    • My code does not create any new warnings from compiler, build system, or lint.
  • The commit message is properly formatted and free of typos.
    • The commit message title makes sense in a changelog, by itself.
    • The commit is signed.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
    • I have updated the documentation accordingly, or...
    • I have created a JIRA ticket to update the documentation.
    • Any new interfaces or exported functions are appropriately commented.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTORS document.
  • The change has been fully tested:
    • I have added tests to cover my changes.
    • All new and existing tests passed.
    • I have checked that this change does not introduce memory leaks.
    • I have used Valgrind or similar tools to check for potential issues.
  • I have given due consideration to all of the following potential concerns:
    • Scalability
    • Performance
    • Security
    • Thread-safety
    • Premature optimization
    • Existing deployed queries will not be broken
    • This change fixes the problem, not just the symptom
    • The target branch of this pull request is appropriate for such a change.
  • There are no similar instances of the same problem that should be addressed
    • I have addressed them here
    • I have raised JIRA issues to address them separately
  • This is a user interface / front-end modification
    • I have tested my changes in multiple modern browsers
    • The component(s) render as expected

Smoketest:

  • Send notifications about my Pull Request position in Smoketest queue.
  • Test my draft Pull Request.

Testing:

@hpcc-jirabot
Copy link

@jakesmith
Copy link
Member Author

@ghalliday - pushed to add a regression test.
Please review

@jakesmith
Copy link
Member Author

@ghalliday @richardkchapman - should be this be 7.2.x?

@richardkchapman
Copy link
Member

Has any 7.2.x user reported it?

@jakesmith
Copy link
Member Author

yes, the only report so far was on 7.2.36

@richardkchapman
Copy link
Member

Bit nervous about adding bugfixes that change the result in a point release. Is there a workaround?

@jakesmith
Copy link
Member Author

jakesmith commented Sep 20, 2019

They succeeded in working around the bug by adding a DEGROUP on the RHS of the join - not sure if guaranteed to remain once optimized though.

Copy link
Member

@ghalliday ghalliday left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jakesmith a couple of questions

leftStream.set(leftInputStream); // already ungrouped
else
leftStream.setown(createUngroupStream(leftInputStream));
leftStream.setown(createUngroupStream(leftInputStream));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there any way of only doing this if the stream is grouped?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess it is an extra virtual call per row,
and I think I can test input->isGrouped() to make it conditional


// Lightweight join is only implemented in Thor
//noroxie
//nohthor
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

what happens if it is run in roxie/hthor?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it will run and match, but appears not generate a lightweight join..

@jakesmith
Copy link
Member Author

@ghalliday - have changed it so conditional on isGrouped()

Not sure whether the new regression query should bother to run on hthor or roxie ?

@ghalliday
Copy link
Member

The change looks good to me. I probably would enable the tests for roxie/hthor, even though they don't generate that specific activity kind.
Need to decide which version to merge this in to.

Signed-off-by: Jake Smith <jake.smith@lexisnexisrisk.com>
@jakesmith
Copy link
Member Author

jakesmith commented Sep 25, 2019

@ghalliday - have changed the regression test so also runs on hthor and roxie (and squashed that change in).

@ghalliday ghalliday merged commit 1c90806 into hpcc-systems:candidate-7.4.x Sep 25, 2019
@HPCCSmoketest
Copy link
Contributor

Automated Smoketest: ✅
OS: centos 7.6.1810 (Linux 3.10.0-327.28.3.el7.x86_64)
GCC:gcc (GCC) 7.3.1 20180303 (Red Hat 7.3.1-5)
Sha: f5e42b6
Build: success
Build: success
Install HPCC Platform
HPCC Start: OK

Unit tests result:

Test total passed failed errors timeout elaps
unittest 113 113 0 0 0 35 sec
wutoolTest(Dali) 19 19 0 0 0 3 sec
wutoolTest(Cassandra) 19 19 0 0 0 7 sec

Regression test result:

phase total pass fail elaps
setup (hthor) 11 11 0 23 sec (00:00:23)
setup (thor) 11 11 0 45 sec (00:00:45)
setup (roxie) 11 11 0 24 sec (00:00:24)
test (hthor) 852 852 0 174 sec (00:02:54)
test (thor) 775 775 0 700 sec (00:11:40)
test (roxie) 928 928 0 235 sec (00:03:55)

HPCC Stop: OK
Time stats:

Prep time Build time Package time Install time Start time Test time Stop time Summary
35 sec (00:00:35) 252 sec (00:04:12) 0 sec (00:00:00) 3 sec (00:00:03) 19 sec (00:00:19) 1423 sec (00:23:43) 20 sec (00:00:20) 1752 sec (00:29:12)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants