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

Handle case of sequence number 0 files for compatibility with RocksDB. #332

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 7, 2019

Conversation

sumeerbhola
Copy link
Collaborator

Fixes #316

@petermattis
Copy link
Collaborator

This change is Reviewable

Copy link
Collaborator

@petermattis petermattis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

:lgtm: modulo comment that somehow this scenario is happening in Pebble as well. Do you want me to dig into why?

Reviewable status: 0 of 5 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @ajkr, @itsbilal, @petermattis, and @sumeerbhola)


internal/manifest/version.go, line 461 at r1 (raw file):

		// in the file key intervals. This file is placed in L0 since it overlaps in the file
		// key intervals but since it has no overlapping data, it is assigned a sequence number
		// of 0 in RocksDB. We handle this case for compatibility with RocksDB.

#316 indicates that somehow Pebble is encountering this case as well. I'm not sure how, though.

Copy link
Collaborator

@petermattis petermattis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do you want me to dig into why?

Seems to be a bug with range tombstones, and least in the case I'm looking at.

Reviewable status: 0 of 5 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @ajkr, @itsbilal, and @sumeerbhola)

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@sumeerbhola sumeerbhola left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

thanks for looking. Should I hold off on submitting this?

Reviewable status: 0 of 5 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @ajkr, @itsbilal, and @sumeerbhola)

Copy link
Collaborator

@petermattis petermattis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No, this looks good to go. Still tracking down what is going on, but the search is now focused on flushable batches.

Reviewable status: 0 of 5 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @ajkr, @itsbilal, and @sumeerbhola)

@sumeerbhola sumeerbhola merged commit 9509253 into cockroachdb:master Oct 7, 2019
@sumeerbhola sumeerbhola deleted the zero_seqnum branch October 7, 2019 13:05
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Version.CheckOrdering firing for L0 tables with zeroed seqnums
2 participants