This repository was archived by the owner on Oct 10, 2025. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 320
Merge free pages after rollback #5921
Open
benjaminwinger
wants to merge
2
commits into
master
Choose a base branch
from
merge-free-pages-after-rollback
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's rename
mergeFreePagesto something likefinalizeRollback(this in the page manager too)? I'd like the use case of this function to be very specific since in general we shouldn't we worrying about the structure of the FSM in other modules.I'd also like to change this to only merge the existing page ranges. I don't want this function to truncate the data file (or modify
uncheckpointedFreePageRanges, although in practice it should always be empty in this case) since I'd like to maintain the assumption that we don't touch the data file or anything persistent outside of checkpoint. Maybe you can just refactormergePageRanges()into two functions and just call the one that only does the merging.Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That sounds like a good idea to me
What about for copies where we already touch the data file outside of checkpoints? E.g. in
CopyNodeAfterPKErrorRollbackFlushedGroupsthe rollback occurs after we've written some of the data (even if none of the data is written successfully, we currently write to the node table before updating the index, where the primary key insertion fails in that test). I would think that particularly for duplicate PK errors (e.g. if you accidentally copy the same input twice) we wouldn't want to keep the newly added pages, since the user might not want to retry.Though isn't this only being used when we've touched the data file? We usually delay allocating pages until we're ready to write them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it’s fine to leave the data as garbage, it should be either overwritten or truncated after the next checkpoint. Since we rollback local storage even if there is no COPY (e.g. after just issuing a rollback statement) I’d still like to keep those cases from touching disk if possible.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
maybe only calling finalizerollback if we detect changes in the fsm works (we already have the versioning in place). That might also be unnecessarily complicating things though, I’ll leave this decision to you.