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

planner: fix the issue of reusing wrong point-plan for "select ... for update" (#54661) #54938

Conversation

ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

This is an automated cherry-pick of #54661

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #54652

Problem Summary: planner: fix the issue of reusing wrong point-plan for "select ... for update"

What changed and how does it work?

Encode more txn state into the plan cache key, and check whether the key has changed before reusing point-get plans.

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  • No need to test
    • I checked and no code files have been changed.

Side effects

  • Performance regression: Consumes more CPU
  • Performance regression: Consumes more Memory
  • Breaking backward compatibility

Documentation

  • Affects user behaviors
  • Contains syntax changes
  • Contains variable changes
  • Contains experimental features
  • Changes MySQL compatibility

Release note

Please refer to Release Notes Language Style Guide to write a quality release note.

None

Sorry, something went wrong.

Verified

This commit was signed with the committer’s verified signature.
snyk-bot Snyk bot
Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <[email protected]>
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/planner SIG: Planner size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. type/cherry-pick-for-release-6.5 This PR is cherry-picked to release-6.5 from a source PR. labels Jul 26, 2024
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Jul 26, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign chrysan for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jul 26, 2024
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the cherry-pick-approved Cherry pick PR approved by release team. label Jul 26, 2024
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Jul 26, 2024

@ti-chi-bot: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/unit-test 810c5c1 link true /test unit-test
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/build 810c5c1 link true /test build
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/check_dev 810c5c1 link true /test check-dev

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@qw4990
Copy link
Contributor

qw4990 commented Aug 29, 2024

I'll pick this manually later.

@qw4990 qw4990 closed this Aug 29, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cherry-pick-approved Cherry pick PR approved by release team. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/planner SIG: Planner size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. type/cherry-pick-for-release-6.5 This PR is cherry-picked to release-6.5 from a source PR.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants