-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.8k
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
sql: TestSchemaChangeEvalContext failed #54775
Comments
This flake is caused by #54755. |
(sql).TestSchemaChangeEvalContext failed on master@66a076f89e92becc1d7e1a2ecfd39c275165e2d8:
MoreParameters:
See this test on roachdash |
(sql).TestSchemaChangeEvalContext failed on master@66a076f89e92becc1d7e1a2ecfd39c275165e2d8:
MoreParameters:
See this test on roachdash |
Ran into this here: https://teamcity.cockroachdb.com/buildConfiguration/Cockroach_UnitTests/2323471? |
Refs: cockroachdb#54775 Reason: flaky test Generated by bin/skip-test. Release justification: non-production code changes Release note: None
54768: opt: update cost of index join and statistics of array contains operation r=rytaft a=rytaft **opt: update statistics of array contains operation to match json contains** Prior to this commit, the selectivity of `j @> '{"a": "b"}'::json` was calculated as `1/9`, while the selectivity of `a @> array[1]` was calculated as `1/3`. Both of these predicates essentially represent one "path" that can be queried in an inverted index, so they should have the same selectivity. Furthermore, multiple paths should be more selective, so in the same way that the predicate `j @> '{"a": "b", "c": "d"}'::json` has selectivity `(1/9 * 1/9)`, `a @> array[1,2]` should similarly have selectivity `(1/9 * 1/9)`. This commit updates the logic in the statistics builder so that this is the case. Release note (performance improvement): Improved the selectivity estimate for array contains predicates (e.g., `arr @> ARRAY[1]`) in the optimizer. This improves the optimizer's cardinality estimation for queries containing these predicates, and may result in better query plans in some cases. **opt: update cost of index join to match cost of lookup join** Prior to this commit, the cost of an index join was much less than the cost of an equivalent lookup join. Since index joins have the same implementation as lookup joins when the lookup columns form a key in the lookup table, the two operators should have the same cost. This commit updates the coster so that this is the case. Informs #46677 Release note (performance improvement): Updated the cost model in the optimizer to make index joins more expensive and better reflect the reality of their cost. As a result, the optimizer will choose index joins less frequently, generally resulting in more efficient query plans. 54772: workload: bump the tpcc fixture version; create statistics when making fixtures r=RaduBerinde a=RaduBerinde #### workload: bump the tpcc fixture version The TPCC fixtures need refreshing: they contain FK indexes that we no longer need, and they are missing stats for some of the tables. This commit bumps the fixture version and incorporates the `deprecated-fk-indexes` flag into the fixture name. Release note: None #### workload: create statistics when making fixtures `workload make` imports a workload and then creates the backup (that can be later used by `workload load`). This change adds functionality to call CREATE STATISTICS on all tables before creating the backup. This can be turned off using a flag. Release note: None I am in the process of regenerating the fixtures with the new version. Informs #54702. Informs #50911. 54784: deps: bump cockroachdb/redact r=andreimatei a=knz To pick up the pointer formatting fix from cockroachdb/redact#9 Release note: None 54804: sql: skip TestSchemaChangeEvalContext r=yuzefovich a=yuzefovich Refs: #54775 Reason: flaky test Generated by bin/skip-test. Release justification: non-production code changes Release note: None Co-authored-by: Rebecca Taft <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Radu Berinde <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Raphael 'kena' Poss <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Yahor Yuzefovich <[email protected]>
(sql).TestSchemaChangeEvalContext failed on master@21f67e8534737f68ba9aad79aae8e24c1a6bdaba:
MoreParameters:
See this test on roachdash |
I'm not convinced this is fixed by #54755 |
Alright, this bug was revealed by a different bug introduced in #54755. The bug introduced there was that we'd clobber subtracting spans. The bug that it reveals is that different iterations of the backfill will use a different timestamp. We grab Line 614 in db9c393
|
I'm not sure I understand the relationship between #54755 and this bug. Why exactly did this test pass before? |
It passed before because we'd only ever go through the loop one time (I don't think that that was the intention of the test, but it rotted). I introduced a bug whereby we'd go through the loop multiple times (it's a bad bug but easy to fix). When I send a PR in a few minutes, things should become clearer. |
54900: sql: fix a bug tracking spans in a backfill r=lucy-zhang a=ajwerner Fixes a bug introduced in #54755 whereby we'd always subtract from the original set of spans rather than from the updated set of spans meaning that we could backfill the same span multiple times. Fixes #54775. Release note: None Co-authored-by: Andrew Werner <[email protected]>
(sql).TestSchemaChangeEvalContext failed on master@66a076f89e92becc1d7e1a2ecfd39c275165e2d8:
More
Parameters:
See this test on roachdash
powered by pkg/cmd/internal/issues
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: