membuffer: improve ART's code and test coverage #1477
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: you06 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: you06 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: you06 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: you06 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: you06 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: you06 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: you06 <[email protected]>
ti-chi-bot
bot
added
dco-signoff: yes
Signed-off-by: you06 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: you06 <[email protected]>
cfzjywxk
requested review from
cfzjywxk,
zyguan,
MyonKeminta,
crazycs520 and
ekexium
cfzjywxk
reviewed
Oct 18, 2024
cfzjywxk
reviewed
Oct 18, 2024
ekexium
reviewed
Oct 21, 2024
| @@ -300,11 +306,7 @@ func (t *ART) expandLeaf(key artKey, depth uint32, prev, current artNode) (arena | |||
| newAn.addChild(&t.allocator, l2Key.charAt(int(depth)), !l2Key.valid(int(depth)), leaf2Addr) | |||
|
|
|||
| // swap the old leaf with the new node4. | |||
| if prev == nullArtNode { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why can we remove the check?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Because the root node can't be a leaf, so when we expanding a leaf, the prev node is definitely not null.
Consider this case:
1. t.root == nullArtNode
2. insert a key [1, 2], t.root becomes a node4
3. insert a key [1, 3], t.root.findChild(1) is a leaf, so expandLeaf will be invoked, prev is t.root now
Signed-off-by: you06 <[email protected]>
cfzjywxk
reviewed
Oct 24, 2024
Signed-off-by: you06 <[email protected]>
cfzjywxk
reviewed
Oct 29, 2024
ekexium
approved these changes
Oct 29, 2024
| @@ -212,6 +212,14 @@ func (e *ErrTxnTooLarge) Error() string { | |||
| return fmt.Sprintf("txn too large, size: %v.", e.Size) | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| type ErrKeyTooLarge struct { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Kind reminder: TiDB should have corresponding conversions.
ti-chi-bot
bot
added
needs-1-more-lgtm
Signed-off-by: you06 <[email protected]>
cfzjywxk
reviewed
Oct 29, 2024
Signed-off-by: you06 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: you06 <[email protected]>
cfzjywxk
approved these changes
Oct 30, 2024
ti-chi-bot
bot
added
lgtm
and removed
needs-1-more-lgtm
Signed-off-by: you06 <[email protected]>
cfzjywxk
approved these changes
Oct 30, 2024
|
@ekexium PTAL again |
ekexium
approved these changes
Oct 31, 2024
ti-chi-bot
bot
added
lgtm
and removed
needs-1-more-lgtm
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: cfzjywxk, ekexium The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
[LGTM Timeline notifier]Timeline:
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
ref pingcap/tidb#55287
This PR tries to make the code simplify and increase the test coverage (only some unreachable paths are not covered).