Skip to content

Conversation

Defined2014
Copy link
Contributor

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #54173

Problem Summary:

What changed and how does it work?

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  • No need to test
    • I checked and no code files have been changed.

Side effects

  • Performance regression: Consumes more CPU
  • Performance regression: Consumes more Memory
  • Breaking backward compatibility

Documentation

  • Affects user behaviors
  • Contains syntax changes
  • Contains variable changes
  • Contains experimental features
  • Changes MySQL compatibility

Release note

Please refer to Release Notes Language Style Guide to write a quality release note.

None

Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Jun 24, 2024

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/planner SIG: Planner labels Jun 24, 2024
@Defined2014 Defined2014 marked this pull request as ready for review June 24, 2024 06:39
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. labels Jun 24, 2024
Copy link

tiprow bot commented Jun 24, 2024

Hi @Defined2014. Thanks for your PR.

PRs from untrusted users cannot be marked as trusted with /ok-to-test in this repo meaning untrusted PR authors can never trigger tests themselves. Collaborators can still trigger tests on the PR using /test all.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

@Defined2014 Defined2014 requested a review from mjonss June 24, 2024 06:39
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 24, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 56.2944%. Comparing base (8ee4897) to head (7a66795).
Report is 42 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@                Coverage Diff                @@
##             master     #54176         +/-   ##
=================================================
- Coverage   72.8670%   56.2944%   -16.5726%     
=================================================
  Files          1516       1639        +123     
  Lines        434796     612529     +177733     
=================================================
+ Hits         316823     344820      +27997     
- Misses        98428     244241     +145813     
- Partials      19545      23468       +3923     
Flag Coverage Δ
integration 37.0888% <100.0000%> (?)
unit 71.7762% <100.0000%> (-0.0866%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Components Coverage Δ
dumpling 52.9656% <ø> (ø)
parser ∅ <ø> (∅)
br 52.3318% <ø> (+6.1990%) ⬆️

Copy link
Contributor

@mjonss mjonss left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, with one minor suggestion.

Comment on lines 151 to 158
rowCount = c.GetTableRows(table.ID)
dataLength, indexLength = c.GetDataAndIndexLength(table, table.ID, rowCount)
} else {
_, globalIndexLen := c.GetDataAndIndexLength(table, table.ID, c.GetTableRows(table.ID))
indexLength += globalIndexLen
for _, pi := range table.GetPartitionInfo().Definitions {
piRowCnt := c.GetTableRows(pi.ID)
rowCount += piRowCnt
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe simplify this if ... else .. block to just a "Getting dataLength, indexLenght" + loop over partitions and add the data and index length for each partition?

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added the needs-1-more-lgtm Indicates a PR needs 1 more LGTM. label Jun 24, 2024
@Defined2014 Defined2014 requested a review from 0xPoe June 25, 2024 01:19
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Jun 25, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: hawkingrei, mjonss

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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added approved lgtm and removed needs-1-more-lgtm Indicates a PR needs 1 more LGTM. labels Jun 25, 2024
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Jun 25, 2024

[LGTM Timeline notifier]

Timeline:

  • 2024-06-24 10:18:12.328837144 +0000 UTC m=+628418.814325975: ☑️ agreed by mjonss.
  • 2024-06-25 02:19:52.226526184 +0000 UTC m=+686118.712015013: ☑️ agreed by hawkingrei.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot merged commit 01cc027 into pingcap:master Jun 25, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved lgtm release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/planner SIG: Planner size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

value of INDEX_LENGTH column is incorrect with global index
3 participants