This happens only when we have a "<" or "<=" filter on distribution
column of a range distributed table and that filter falls in between
two shards.
When the filter falls in between two shards:
If the filter is ">" or ">=", then UpperShardBoundary was
returning "upperBoundIndex - 1", where upperBoundIndex is
exclusive shard index used during binary seach.
This is expected since upperBoundIndex is an exclusive
index.
If the filter is "<" or "<=", then LowerShardBoundary was
returning "lowerBoundIndex + 1", where lowerBoundIndex is
inclusive shard index used during binary seach.
On the other hand, since lowerBoundIndex is an inclusive
index, we should just return lowerBoundIndex instead of
doing "+ 1". Before this commit, we were missing leftmost
shard in such queries.
* Remove useless conditional branches
The branch that we delete from UpperShardBoundary was obviously useless.
The other one in LowerShardBoundary became useless after we remove "+ 1"
from there.
This indeed is another proof of what & how we are fixing with this pr.
* Improve comments and add more
* Add some tests for upper bound calculation too
(cherry picked from commit b118d4188e)
* Also fix a debug message diff for 9.4
Before this commit, we let AdaptiveExecutorPreExecutorRun()
to be effective multiple times on every FETCH on cursors.
That does not affect the correctness of the query results,
but adds significant overhead.
(cherry picked from commit c433c66f2b)
The reason we should use ActiveReadableNodeList instead of ActiveReadableNonCoordinatorNodeList is that if coordinator is added to cluster as a worker, it should be counted as well. Otherwise if there is only coordinator in the cluster, the count will be 0, hence we get a warning.
In MultiTaskTrackerExecute, we should connect to coordinator if it is
added to the cluster because it will also be assigned tasks.
(cherry picked from commit ae6180ace2931223c58b87444a9e812f5e9f06e8)
ActiveReadableWorkerNodeList doesn't include coordinator, however if
coordinator is added as a worker, we should also include that while
planning. The current methods are very easily misusable and this
requires a refactoring to make the distinction between methods that
include coordinator and that don't very explicit as they can introduce
subtle/major bugs pretty easily.
(cherry picked from commit 86b974e4ceddaf5e2c44799148a8cf485c7d90bf)
We were using ALL_WORKERS TargetWorkerSet while sending temporary schema
creation and cleanup. We(well mostly I) thought that ALL_WORKERS would also include coordinator when it is added as a worker. It turns out that it was FILTERING OUT the coordinator even if it is added as a worker to the cluster.
So to have some context here, in repartitions, for each jobId we create
(at least we were supposed to) a schema in each worker node in the cluster. Then we partition each shard table into some intermediate files, which is called the PARTITION step. So after this partition step each node has some intermediate files having tuples in those nodes. Then we fetch the partition files to necessary worker nodes, which is called the FETCH step. Then from the files we create intermediate tables in the temporarily created schemas, which is called a MERGE step. Then after evaluating the result, we remove the temporary schemas(one for each job ID in each node) and files.
If node 1 has file1, and node 2 has file2 after PARTITION step, it is
enough to either move file1 from node1 to node2 or vice versa. So we
prune one of them.
In the MERGE step, if the schema for a given jobID doesn't exist, the
node tries to use the `public` schema if it is a superuser, which is
actually added for testing in the past.
So when we were not sending schema creation comands for each job ID to
the coordinator(because we were using ALL_WORKERS flag, and it doesn't
include the coordinator), we would basically not have any schemas for
repartitions in the coordinator. The PARTITION step would be executed on
the coordinator (because the tasks are generated in the planner part)
and it wouldn't give us any error because it doesn't have anything to do
with the temporary schemas(that we didn't create). But later two things
would happen:
- If by chance the fetch is pruned on the coordinator side, we the other
nodes would fetch the partitioned files from the coordinator and execute
the query as expected, because it has all the information.
- If the fetch tasks are not pruned in the coordinator, in the MERGE
step, the coordinator would either error out saying that the necessary
schema doesn't exist, or it would try to create the temporary tables
under public schema ( if it is a superuser). But then if we had the same
task ID with different jobID it would fail saying that the table already
exists, which is an error we were getting.
In the first case, the query would work okay, but it would still not do
the cleanup, hence we would leave the partitioned files from the
PARTITION step there. Hence ensure_no_intermediate_data_leak would fail.
To make things more explicit and prevent such bugs in the future,
ALL_WORKERS is named as ALL_NON_COORD_WORKERS. And a new flag to return
all the active nodes is added as ALL_DATA_NODES. For repartition case,
we don't use the only-reference table nodes but this version makes the
code simpler and there shouldn't be any significant performance issue
with that.
(cherry picked from commit 6532506f4b92b1316eea0812b2bcedb818d3b25c)
As reported on #4011https://github.com/citusdata/citus/pull/4011/files#r453804702 some of the tests were flapping due to an indeterministic order for test outputs.
This PR makes the test output ordered for all tests returning non-zero rows.
Needs to be backported to 9.2, 9.3, 9.4
(cherry picked from commit 23d44eba9f)
DESCRIPTION: Force aliases in deparsing for queries with anonymous column references
Fixes: #3985
The root cause has todo with discrepancies in the query tree we create. I think in the future we should spend some time on categorising all changes we made to ruleutils and see if we can change the data structure `query` we pass to the deparser to have an actual valid postgres query for the deparser to render.
For now the fix is to keep track, besides changing the names of the entries in the target list, also if we have a reference to an anonymous columns. If there are anonymous columns we set the `printaliases` flag to true which forces the deparser to add the aliases.
(cherry picked from commit 449d1f0e91)
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
(cherry picked from commit ab01571c9e)
Some GUCs support a list of values which is indicated by GUC_LIST_INPUT flag.
When an ALTER ROLE .. SET statement is executed, the new configuration
default for affected users and databases are stored in the
setconfig(text[]) column in a pg_db_role_setting record.
If a GUC that supports a list of values is used in an ALTER ROLE .. SET
statement, we need to split the text into items delimited by commas.
(cherry picked from commit e534dbae4a)
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
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>
We've had two issues with merge conflicts to enterprise in the last week, that
suddenly happened. Because of this CI check this actually blocks all community
PRs from being merged.
This PR tries to improve on the previous script we had, by putting tougher
constraints on when a merge is allowed.
Previously the check would pass in two cases:
1. This PR be merged without conflicts into `enterprise-master`
2. A branch exists with the same name as this PR on enterprise and that can be
merged into `enterprise-master`.
The first case stays the same, but I've changed the second case to require the
following instead:
1. A branch exists on enterprise with the same name as this PR
2. **NEW: This branch contains the the last commit of the community PR branch**
3. This branch can be merged into enterprise-master
This makes sure the enterprise branch is actually up to date and not forgotten about.
If we still get problems with this change, future improvements could be:
1. Check that the PR on enterprise passes CI
2. Check that the PR on enterprise has been approved
3. Require the enterprise PR branch to be merged before merging community.
When we are using hammerdb jobs, the job creates a branch on test
automation, since that branch should be deleted, it would have
`delete_me` prefix, however since the result branch on
release-test-results will have the test automation branch as prefix, it
will also have `delete_me` prefix, which seems a bit confusing.
This PR updates it as citus_github_push
In #3901 the "Data received from worker(s)" sections were added to EXPLAIN
ANALYZE. After merging @pykello posted some review comments. This addresses
those comments as well as fixing a other issues that I found while addressing
them. The things this does:
1. Fix `EXPLAIN ANALYZE EXECUTE p1` to not increase received data on every
execution
2. Fix `EXPLAIN ANALYZE EXECUTE p1(1)` to not return 0 bytes as received data
allways.
3. Move `EXPLAIN ANALYZE` specific logic to `multi_explain.c` from
`adaptive_executor.c`
4. Change naming of new explain sections to `Tuple data received from node(s)`.
Firstly because a task can reference the coordinator too, so "worker(s)" was
incorrect. Secondly to indicate that this is tuple data and not all network
traffic that was performed.
5. Rename `totalReceivedData` in our codebase to `totalReceivedTupleData` to
make it clearer that it's a tuple data counter, not all network traffic.
6. Actually add `binary_protocol` test to `multi_schedule` (woops)
7. Fix a randomly failing test in `local_shard_execution.sql`.
Marco Slot
Hanefi Onaldi
naisila
Onur Tirtir
Gürkan İndibay
Marco Slot
Onder Kalaci
Halil Ozan Akgul
Sait Talha Nisanci
Nils Dijk
Hadi Moshayedi
Jelte Fennema
Philip Dubé