-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 576
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 index tables' partitioning settings to be able to restore them from a backup with the same partitioning as before #5119
Extend index tables' partitioning settings to be able to restore them from a backup with the same partitioning as before #5119
Conversation
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
4d688de
to
e5f1b60
Compare
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
e5f1b60
to
e2cb00c
Compare
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
e2cb00c
to
49321ec
Compare
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
There is a direct leak in one of the added unit tests. However, it is not a new problem. It can be reproduced on a YDB cluster that uses I propose to fix the leak in an other PR. I have created a ticket to track the issue. |
- proto field naming - more reasonable uniform partitions count and min partitions count settings in tests - remove dead code
7d3258f
to
a10ebbe
Compare
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
- repeated field naming
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
- They fail under leak sanitizer. Will investigate in scope of another ticket.
⚪
🟡
*please be aware that the difference is based on comparing your commit and the last completed build from the post-commit, check comparation |
⚪
🟡
*please be aware that the difference is based on comparing your commit and the last completed build from the post-commit, check comparation |
I decided to remove this test from the PR. I will add it back after I fix the problem with the leak |
#4955
There are 3 major commits in this PR, whose purposes are the following:
ydb_table.proto
to be able to specify partitioning settings of theindexImplTable
and explicit partition boundaries (or uniform partition count) of the index table at the moment of its creation. There is also a functional test using GRPC calls that shows that it becomes possible to create a table with extended index partitioning settings.Note: each major commit is preceded by a minor refactoring change. For the best reviewing experience, please review these changes separately.