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

Add a GUC variable to enable/disable OSM reads #4991

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Dec 12, 2022

Conversation

zilder
Copy link
Contributor

@zilder zilder commented Nov 17, 2022

The GUC variable controls whether OSM chunk is used in a select query plan.

@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Nov 17, 2022

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 17, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #4991 (9c401aa) into main (d927390) will decrease coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is 83.33%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4991      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.61%   89.59%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         227      227              
  Lines       51608    51617       +9     
==========================================
- Hits        46251    46248       -3     
- Misses       5357     5369      +12     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/chunk_scan.c 98.05% <ø> (ø)
src/hypertable_restrict_info.c 90.75% <77.77%> (-0.39%) ⬇️
src/guc.c 94.11% <100.00%> (+0.11%) ⬆️
src/process_utility.c 90.20% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
src/loader/bgw_launcher.c 89.51% <0.00%> (-2.55%) ⬇️
src/bgw/scheduler.c 83.63% <0.00%> (-0.26%) ⬇️
tsl/src/bgw_policy/job.c 88.31% <0.00%> (-0.05%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update dd65a6b...9c401aa. Read the comment docs.

@zilder zilder force-pushed the zilder/osm_guc branch 2 times, most recently from a6ddda1 to 93bbc60 Compare December 9, 2022 10:07
chunk_ids = !ts_guc_enable_osm_reads ? list_delete_int(chunk_ids, osm_chunk_id) :
!list_member_int(chunk_ids, osm_chunk_id) ?
lappend_int(chunk_ids, osm_chunk_id) :
chunk_ids;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am surprised we have a code cov issue here. Could you take a look?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I rewrote it into an if/else statement after Jan's suggestion. Codecov now complains about the closing braces, but I don't think I can do anything about it.

Copy link
Contributor

@gayyappan gayyappan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Changes look good to me.

src/guc.c Show resolved Hide resolved
src/guc.c Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@jnidzwetzki jnidzwetzki added this to the TimescaleDB 2.9 milestone Dec 9, 2022
@zilder zilder force-pushed the zilder/osm_guc branch 2 times, most recently from ba902de to 358133f Compare December 12, 2022 09:38
{
chunk_ids = list_delete_int(chunk_ids, osm_chunk_id);
}
else if (!list_member_int(chunk_ids, osm_chunk_id))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nit: list_append_unique_int could be an alternative

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh, I missed that function. Thanks for the review!

@zilder zilder enabled auto-merge (rebase) December 12, 2022 17:23
@zilder zilder merged commit 13ac2fc into timescale:main Dec 12, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants