Native partitioning tokudb draft 5.7 #2313
Closed
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
| /* If this->table == NULL, then the current handler has been created but not | ||
| opened. Prohibit cloning such handler. */ | ||
| if (!table) | ||
| DBUG_RETURN(NULL); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this something we would expect to happen at all or is this really some strong error case where an assertion might be more appropriate?
| new_handler= new (mem_root) ha_tokupart(ht, table_share, m_part_info, | ||
| this, mem_root); | ||
| if (!new_handler) | ||
| DBUG_RETURN(NULL); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same, this seems like an OOM problem so maybe a hard assertion/abort is in order?
vlad-lesin
force-pushed
the
native-partitioning-tokudb-draft-5.7
branch
from
6db1de7 to
2ecb3d4
Compare
…ct' functionality. The general issue is that native partitioning initialization sequence is not the same as for non-native partitioning. Some functions are invoked before partition info is filled in, and, as a result, we can't initialize the array of partition file handlers. That is why the array initialization was moved to "open/create" functions, they are invoked when all necessary information is gathered from statement or *.frm file. The another issue was using the correct mem_root object for file handlers allocation. The initial code uses thd->mem_root, what is wrong, because it will be deallocated after query execution, and it worked only because thd->mem_root object was replaced with share->mem_root just before file handlers initialization. The current code uses share->mem_root explicitly.
vlad-lesin
force-pushed
the
native-partitioning-tokudb-draft-5.7
branch
from
2ecb3d4 to
b8c7df5
Compare
|
Closing this now, as native partitioning is already merged in #2493 |
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.
This PR is for preliminary code review and implementation details discussion, please, DON'T merge it.
It's more convenient to review the code commit-by-commit because the first two commits is just a copy of ha_partition.* and renaming the correspondent classes. Otherwise to see the changes in non-native-partitioning handler it is necessary to use "diff".
Also it's supposed that Partition_base will be used for RocksDB too. In the code there are first steps to split common and partition-specific code.