-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 701
Extend DDL/MDL info #20329
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
Extend DDL/MDL info #20329
Conversation
Co-authored-by: xixirangrang <hfxsd@hotmail.com>
Co-authored-by: xixirangrang <hfxsd@hotmail.com>
Co-authored-by: xixirangrang <hfxsd@hotmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM with some suggestions
| job_id | bigint | NO | PRI | NULL | | | ||
| db_name | longtext | YES | | NULL | | | ||
| table_name | longtext | YES | | NULL | | | ||
| query | longtext | YES | | NULL | | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we clarify the different fields as well?
Looking at https://docs.pingcap.com/tidb/stable/metadata-lock/#observability the query is the DDL, and the session ID and SQL_DIGESTS are from the blocking DML queries.
Also there is a mismatch between the lower case names in this table and the UPPER CASE field names in https://docs.pingcap.com/tidb/stable/metadata-lock/#observability.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've updated the other doc as well to match the v8.5.1 behavior.
| SQL_DIGESTS | varchar(5) | YES | | NULL | | | ||
+-------------+-----------------+------+------+---------+-------+ | ||
7 rows in set (0.00 sec) | ||
``` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we also have an example of where it is used, or at least a backlink to https://docs.pingcap.com/tidb/stable/metadata-lock/#observability ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On line 8 we link to that information.
@mjonss: adding LGTM is restricted to approvers and reviewers in OWNERS files. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
/approve |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: hfxsd The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created to branch |
What is changed, added or deleted? (Required)
https://docs.pingcap.com/tidb/stable/metadata-lock#observability gives some useful info, but it is hard to find and this table lacks documentation.
Which TiDB version(s) do your changes apply to? (Required)
Tips for choosing the affected version(s):
By default, CHOOSE MASTER ONLY so your changes will be applied to the next TiDB major or minor releases. If your PR involves a product feature behavior change or a compatibility change, CHOOSE THE AFFECTED RELEASE BRANCH(ES) AND MASTER.
For details, see tips for choosing the affected versions.
What is the related PR or file link(s)?
Do your changes match any of the following descriptions?