util, executor: deep clone shallowRow in baseJoiner.Clone (#16644) #16786
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
/run-all-tests |
ghost
requested a review
from 
sre-bot
added
sig/execution
|
/run-integration-copr-test |
1 similar comment
|
/run-integration-copr-test |
|
/run-integration-copr-test |
XuHuaiyu
added
status/all-tests-passed
status/LGT2
XuHuaiyu
added
the
priority/release-blocker
zz-jason
approved these changes
Apr 24, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
cherry-pick #16644 to release-4.0
What problem does this PR solve?
Issue Number: close #16586
Problem Summary:
What is changed and how it works?
Proposal: xxx
What's Changed:
Deep clone shallowRow in baseJoiner.Clone
How it Works:
joiner.shallowRow will not be modified unexpectedly when parallelly execution.
Related changes
Check List
Tests
Side effects
Release note
Deep clone shallowRow in baseJoiner.Clone to fix a correctness issue when IndexHashJoin execute parallelly