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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

planner: refine prefer-range-scan behavior #27123

Merged
merged 21 commits into from
Sep 2, 2021
Merged

planner: refine prefer-range-scan behavior #27123

merged 21 commits into from
Sep 2, 2021

Conversation

xuyifangreeneyes
Copy link
Contributor

@xuyifangreeneyes xuyifangreeneyes commented Aug 11, 2021 •
edited by tisonkun
Loading

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #27228

Problem Summary:

What is changed and how it works?

  1. Refine IsFullRange check. The full range of the unsigned int handle table scan is [0, +inf], which is regarded as not full range by IsFullRange. The PR fixes it.
  2. Before the PR, prefer-range-scan only removes the first full scan path if some range scan path exists. After the PR, prefer-range-scan removes all the full scan paths if some range scan path exists (TiFlash path or hint-indicated path will not be removed).
  3. Set tidb_opt_prefer_range_scan as global/session switch.

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  • No code

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 

None

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

ti-chi-bot commented Aug 11, 2021 •
edited
Loading

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

  • time-and-fate
  • winoros

To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling /cc @reviewer in the comment.
After your PR has acquired the required number of LGTMs, you can assign this pull request to the committer in the list by filling /assign @committer in the comment to help you merge this pull request.

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

Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review.
Reviewer can cancel approval by submitting a request changes review.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Aug 11, 2021
@xuyifangreeneyes
Copy link
Contributor Author

/sig planner

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the sig/planner SIG: Planner label Aug 11, 2021
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Aug 11, 2021
@xuyifangreeneyes
Copy link
Contributor Author

/cc @winoros

@github-actions github-actions bot added the sig/execution SIG execution label Aug 11, 2021
winoros
winoros reviewed Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
planner/core/explain.go Outdated
@@ -322,7 +322,13 @@ func (p *PhysicalTableScan) isFullScan() bool {
return false
}
for _, ran := range p.Ranges {
if !ran.IsFullRange() {
var unsignedIntHandle bool
if p.Table.PKIsHandle {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This can be treated as a tiny bug-fix?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, so do we need to split it to another pr?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Here is okay.

planner/core/find_best_task.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@xuyifangreeneyes xuyifangreeneyes mentioned this pull request Aug 13, 2021
Merged
11 tasks
time-and-fate
time-and-fate reviewed Aug 13, 2021
View reviewed changes
planner/core/explain.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
planner/core/find_best_task.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
planner/core/find_best_task.go Show resolved Hide resolved
@time-and-fate
Copy link
Member

Also please fix the failed cases.

@xuyifangreeneyes xuyifangreeneyes mentioned this pull request Aug 14, 2021
Closed
8 tasks
@xuyifangreeneyes xuyifangreeneyes mentioned this pull request Aug 25, 2021
Closed
12 tasks
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Aug 29, 2021
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Aug 30, 2021
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Sep 1, 2021
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. and removed status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. labels Sep 1, 2021
@winoros
Copy link
Member

winoros commented Sep 2, 2021

/merge

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge.

Commit hash: 9632446

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Sep 2, 2021
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot merged commit afca764 into pingcap:master Sep 2, 2021
@xuyifangreeneyes xuyifangreeneyes deleted the refine-prefer-range-scan branch October 30, 2021 05:06
@xuyifangreeneyes xuyifangreeneyes mentioned this pull request Dec 1, 2021
Closed
12 tasks
@xuyifangreeneyes
Copy link
Contributor Author

/need-cherry-pick

@xuyifangreeneyes
Copy link
Contributor Author

/cherry-pick-5.1

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@winoros winoros winoros approved these changes

@time-and-fate time-and-fate time-and-fate approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/execution SIG execution sig/planner SIG: Planner size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

refine prefer-range-scan behavior
4 participants
@xuyifangreeneyes @ti-chi-bot @time-and-fate @winoros