Static analysis found some issues where we used the result from
ExtractResultRelationRTE, without checking that it wasn't NULL. It seems
like in all these cases it can never actually be NULL, since we have checked
before that it isn't a SELECT query. So, this PR is mostly to make static
analysis happy (and protect a bit against future changes of the code).
Static analysis found an issue where we could dereference `NULL`, because
`CreateDummyPlacement` could return `NULL` when there were no workers. This
PR changes it so that it never returns `NULL`, which was intended by
@marcocitus when doing this change: https://github.com/citusdata/citus/pull/3887/files#r438136433
While adding tests for citus on a single node I also added some more basic
tests and it turns out we error out on repartition joins. This has been
present since `shouldhaveshards` was introduced and is not trivial to fix.
So I created a separate issue for this: https://github.com/citusdata/citus/issues/3996
I recently forgot to add tests to a schedule in two of my PRs. One of
these was caught by review, but the other one was not. This adds a
script to causes CI to ensure that each test in the repo is included in
at least one schedule.
Three tests were found that were currently not part of a schedule. This PR
adds those three tests to a schedule as well and it also fixes some small
issues with these tests.
We keep accumulating more and more scripts to flag issues in CI. This is
good, but we are currently missing consistent documentation for them.
This commit moves all these scripts to the `ci` directory and adds some
documentation for all of them in the README. It also makes sure that the
last line of output of a failed script points to this documentation.
We keep accumulating more and more scripts to flag issues in CI. This is
good, but we are currently missing consistent documentation for them.
This commit moves all these scripts to the `ci` directory and adds some
documentation for all of them in the README. It also makes sure that the
last line of output of a failed script points to this documentation.
#3866 removed the shard ID hash in metadata_cache.c to simplify cache management,
but we observed a significant performance regression that was being masked by the
performance improvement provided by #3654 in our benchmarks, but #3654 only
applies to specific workloads.
This PR brings back the shard ID cache as it existed before #3866 with some extra
measures to handle invalidation. When we load a table entry, we overwrite
ShardIdCacheEntry->tableEntry pointers for all the shards in that table, though
it's possible that the table no longer contains the old shard ID or the table
entry is never reloaded, which would leave a dangling pointer once the table
entry is freed. To handle that case, we remove all shard ID cache entries that
point exactly to that table entry when a table is freed (at the end of the
transaction or any call to CitusTableCacheFlushInvalidatedEntries).
Co-authored-by: SaitTalhaNisanci <s.talhanisanci@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Marco Slot <marco.slot@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Jelte Fennema <github-tech@jeltef.nl>
It was possible to get an assertion error, if a DML command was
cancelled that opened a connection and then "ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT" was
used to continue the transaction. The reason for this was that canceling
the transaction might leave the `claimedExclusively` flag on for (some
of) it's connections.
This caused an assertion failure because `CanUseExistingConnection`
would return false and a new connection would be opened, and then there
would be two connections doing DML for the same placement. Which is
disallowed. That this situation caused an assertion failure instead of
an error, means that without asserts this could possibly result in some
visibility bugs, similar to the ones described
https://github.com/citusdata/citus/issues/3867
The only reason for this upgrade is to see if it will fix codecov
pushing the coverage many times to PRs, which is cluttering the PRs.
The reason for this change is that it is possible that "pushing many
times" is related to codecov internals so upgrading can help.
This is so we don't need to calculate it twice in
insert_select_executor.c and multi_explain.c, which can
cause discrepancy if an update in one of them is not
reflected in the other site.
* Not set TaskExecution with adaptive executor
Adaptive executor is using a utility method from task tracker for
repartition joins, however adaptive executor doesn't need taskExecution.
It is only used by task tracker. This causes a problem when explain
analyze is used because what taskExecution is pointing to might be
random.
We solve this by not setting taskExecution from adaptive executor. So it
will stay NULL as set by CreateTask.
* use same memory context as task for taskExecution
Co-authored-by: Jelte Fennema <github-tech@jeltef.nl>
As suggested by @marcocitus in https://github.com/citusdata/citus/pull/3911#issuecomment-643978531, there was
a regression in #3893. If another backend would write a file during deletion of
the intermediate results directory, this file would not necessarily be deleted.
The approach used in `CitusRemoveDirectory` is to try recursive removal of the
directory again if it has failed. This does not work here, since when a file
can not be removed for other reasons (e.g. `EPERM`) it will not throw an error
anymore. So then we would get into an infinite removal loop. Instead I now
`rename` the directory before removing it. That way other backends will not
write files to it anymore.
Jelte Fennema
SaitTalhaNisanci
Onur Tirtir
Hadi Moshayedi
Hadi Moshayedi
Philip Dubé
Philip Dubé
Marco Slot
citus bot
Marco Slot
Önder Kalacı
Onder Kalaci
Hanefi Onaldi