-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.8k
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
util/ranger: Handle boundary value correctly in ranger to avoid incorrect tableDual plan #52225
Conversation
Hi @onlyacat. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a pingcap member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
Hi @onlyacat. Thanks for your PR. PRs from untrusted users cannot be marked as trusted with I understand the commands that are listed here. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
PTAL @wjhuang2016 @fixdb |
/ok-to-test |
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #52225 +/- ##
=================================================
- Coverage 72.3769% 55.1474% -17.2296%
=================================================
Files 1474 1674 +200
Lines 427589 644891 +217302
=================================================
+ Hits 309476 355641 +46165
- Misses 98890 266011 +167121
- Partials 19223 23239 +4016
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: winoros, wjhuang2016 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:
|
Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <ti-community-prow-bot@tidb.io>
In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created to branch |
/cherrypick release-8.1 |
@hawkingrei: new pull request created to branch In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository. |
/cherrypick release-7.1 |
@hawkingrei: new pull request created to branch In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository. |
@hawkingrei: new pull request created to branch In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository. |
/cherry-pick release-8.1 |
In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request could not be created: failed to create pull request against pingcap/tidb#release-8.1 from head ti-chi-bot:cherry-pick-52225-to-release-8.1: status code 422 not one of [201], body: {"message":"Validation Failed","errors":[{"resource":"PullRequest","code":"custom","message":"No commits between pingcap:release-8.1 and ti-chi-bot:cherry-pick-52225-to-release-8.1"}],"documentation_url":"https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/pulls#create-a-pull-request"} |
@qw4990: new pull request could not be created: failed to create pull request against pingcap/tidb#release-8.1 from head ti-chi-bot:cherry-pick-52225-to-release-8.1: status code 422 not one of [201], body: {"message":"Validation Failed","errors":[{"resource":"PullRequest","code":"custom","message":"No commits between pingcap:release-8.1 and ti-chi-bot:cherry-pick-52225-to-release-8.1"}],"documentation_url":"https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/pulls#create-a-pull-request"} In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository. |
/cherry-pick release-8.1 |
@winoros: new pull request could not be created: failed to create pull request against pingcap/tidb#release-8.1 from head ti-chi-bot:cherry-pick-52225-to-release-8.1: status code 422 not one of [201], body: {"message":"Validation Failed","errors":[{"resource":"PullRequest","code":"custom","message":"No commits between pingcap:release-8.1 and ti-chi-bot:cherry-pick-52225-to-release-8.1"}],"documentation_url":"https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/pulls#create-a-pull-request","status":"422"} In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository. |
What problem does this PR solve?
Issue Number: close #50051
Problem Summary:
The function
excludeToIncludeForIntPoint
should deal with the boundary value correctly.What changed and how does it work?
I guess it is not a bad idea to change the type of the point in this case.
Check List
Tests
Side effects
Documentation
Release note
Please refer to Release Notes Language Style Guide to write a quality release note.