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

infoschema: Move status and variables to P_S #56569

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

infoschema: Move status and variables to P_S #56569

wants to merge 5 commits into from

Conversation

dveeden
Copy link
Contributor

@dveeden dveeden commented Oct 11, 2024

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #9154

Problem Summary:

What changed and how does it work?

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  • No need to test
    • I checked and no code files have been changed.

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

Please refer to Release Notes Language Style Guide to write a quality release note.

The `GLOBAL_VARIABLES`, `SESSION_VARIABLES`, `GLOBAL_STATUS` and `SESSION_STATUS` are now only available in the `performance_schema` schema.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Oct 11, 2024

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Oct 11, 2024
@tiprow tiprow
Copy link

tiprow bot commented Oct 11, 2024

Hi @dveeden. Thanks for your PR.

PRs from untrusted users cannot be marked as trusted with /ok-to-test in this repo meaning untrusted PR authors can never trigger tests themselves. Collaborators can still trigger tests on the PR using /test all.

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-sigs/prow repository.

@dveeden
Copy link
Contributor Author

dveeden commented Oct 11, 2024

/ok-to-test

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added the ok-to-test Indicates a PR is ready to be tested. label Oct 11, 2024
@dveeden dveeden marked this pull request as ready for review October 11, 2024 07:59
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Oct 11, 2024
@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 11, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 56.9849%. Comparing base (e68c26a) to head (7efa9e0).
Report is 26 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@                Coverage Diff                @@
##             master     #56569         +/-   ##
=================================================
- Coverage   73.3444%   56.9849%   -16.3596%     
=================================================
  Files          1627       1776        +149     
  Lines        449520     636354     +186834     
=================================================
+ Hits         329698     362626      +32928     
- Misses        99594     248743     +149149     
- Partials      20228      24985       +4757
Flag Coverage Δ
integration 39.1050% <ø> (?)
unit 72.5241% <ø> (+0.0645%) ⬆️

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

Components Coverage Δ
dumpling 52.9478% <ø> (ø)
parser ∅ <ø> (∅)
br 63.1248% <ø> (+17.5235%) ⬆️

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Oct 11, 2024
@dveeden
Copy link
Contributor Author

dveeden commented Oct 11, 2024

/retest

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Oct 14, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: lance6716
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign tangenta for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added the needs-1-more-lgtm Indicates a PR needs 1 more LGTM. label Oct 14, 2024
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Oct 14, 2024

[LGTM Timeline notifier]

Timeline:

  • 2024-10-14 03:46:34.525202896 +0000 UTC m=+242791.674112725: ☑️ agreed by lance6716.

mjonss
mjonss reviewed Oct 15, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@mjonss mjonss left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Are upgrades affected by this? Or is it just all in memory so it just depends on the TiDB node you are connecting to?

pkg/infoschema/tables.go
TablePartitions: autoid.InformationSchemaDBID + 11,
TableKeyColumn: autoid.InformationSchemaDBID + 12,
TableReferConst: autoid.InformationSchemaDBID + 13,
// TableSessionVar: autoid.InformationSchemaDBID + 14,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why comment out this and remove the other three? (tableGlobalStatus,tableGlobalVariables and tableSessionStatus)

tests/integrationtest/t/executor/infoschema_reader.test
@@ -183,9 +183,6 @@ select * from information_schema.`METRICS_TABLES` where table_name='tidb_qps';
# TestTableConstraintsTable
select * from information_schema.TABLE_CONSTRAINTS where TABLE_NAME='gc_delete_range';

# TestTableSessionVar
select * from information_schema.SESSION_VARIABLES where VARIABLE_NAME='tidb_retry_limit';
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could we have negative tests (i.e. that the tables does not exists) for the four old information_schema tables?

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

@mjonss mjonss mjonss left review comments

@lance6716 lance6716 lance6716 approved these changes

@Defined2014 Defined2014 Awaiting requested review from Defined2014

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
needs-1-more-lgtm Indicates a PR needs 1 more LGTM. ok-to-test Indicates a PR is ready to be tested. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

MySQL 8.0: Remove i_s.*variables, i_s.*status
3 participants
@dveeden @lance6716 @mjonss