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

Refactoring removeSegment flow in upsert #13449

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jun 27, 2024

Conversation

tibrewalpratik17
Copy link
Contributor

@tibrewalpratik17 tibrewalpratik17 commented Jun 20, 2024

Just like in #13396 , refactoring the upsert-manager class to have a consistent naming convention for removeSegment flow as well. Making doRemoveSegment flow an abstract method instead.

Also we were passing IndexSegment segment, MutableRoaringBitmap validDocIds to the method but IMO passing recordInfoIterator instead of validDocIds makes the method more generic. In #13347 we are planning to iterate through the entire segment and not just validDocID records so this change makes it easier to add unit-tests for that patch as well.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jun 24, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 66.66667% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 62.04%. Comparing base (59551e4) to head (c271531).
Report is 684 commits behind head on master.

Files Patch % Lines
...cal/upsert/BasePartitionUpsertMetadataManager.java 50.00% 4 Missing ⚠️
...t/ConcurrentMapPartitionUpsertMetadataManager.java 66.66% 1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master   #13449      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     61.75%   62.04%   +0.29%     
+ Complexity      207      198       -9     
============================================
  Files          2436     2559     +123     
  Lines        133233   141356    +8123     
  Branches      20636    21928    +1292     
============================================
+ Hits          82274    87702    +5428     
- Misses        44911    47002    +2091     
- Partials       6048     6652     +604     
Flag Coverage Δ
custom-integration1 <0.01% <0.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
integration <0.01% <0.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
integration1 <0.01% <0.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
integration2 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
java-11 62.00% <66.66%> (+0.29%) ⬆️
java-21 61.93% <66.66%> (+0.30%) ⬆️
skip-bytebuffers-false 62.02% <66.66%> (+0.27%) ⬆️
skip-bytebuffers-true 61.90% <66.66%> (+34.18%) ⬆️
temurin 62.04% <66.66%> (+0.29%) ⬆️
unittests 62.03% <66.66%> (+0.29%) ⬆️
unittests1 46.69% <0.00%> (-0.20%) ⬇️
unittests2 27.54% <66.66%> (-0.19%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@tibrewalpratik17 tibrewalpratik17 force-pushed the refactor_upsert branch 2 times, most recently from 8e2c3fc to 3f92d1b Compare June 26, 2024 20:13
@Jackie-Jiang Jackie-Jiang merged commit 76729f8 into apache:master Jun 27, 2024
20 checks passed
suyashpatel98 pushed a commit to suyashpatel98/pinot that referenced this pull request Jul 6, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants