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

executor: remove Next function for HashAggExec #5987

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Mar 22, 2018
Merged

Conversation

lwhile
Copy link
Contributor

@lwhile lwhile commented Mar 9, 2018

No description provided.

@sre-bot
Copy link
Contributor

sre-bot commented Mar 9, 2018

Hi contributor, thanks for your PR.

This patch needs to be approved by someone of admins. They should reply with "/ok-to-test" to accept this PR for running test automatically.

@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Mar 9, 2018

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

// In this stage we consider all data from src as a single group.
if !e.executed {
for {
hasMore, err := e.innerNext(ctx)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

can we remove innerNext ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think so, let me remove it.

@zz-jason
Copy link
Member

zz-jason commented Mar 9, 2018

@lwhile please fix ci.

@zz-jason zz-jason changed the title Remove HashAggExec Next method of executor/aggregate.go executor: remove Next function for HashAggExec Mar 9, 2018
@zz-jason
Copy link
Member

zz-jason commented Mar 9, 2018

to #5985

@lwhile
Copy link
Contributor Author

lwhile commented Mar 9, 2018

@zz-jason Ok, I will fix it tonight or tomorrow. If RP has the time limit, please let me know.

@zz-jason zz-jason added the contribution This PR is from a community contributor. label Mar 9, 2018
@lwhile
Copy link
Contributor Author

lwhile commented Mar 10, 2018

@zz-jason Can I remove all the Next test in executor/executor_test.go?

@zz-jason
Copy link
Member

@lwhile No. We should rewrite them instead.

@lwhile
Copy link
Contributor Author

lwhile commented Mar 10, 2018

@zz-jason I am confused about the output of CI and I have no debug environment.Please give me some Infomation for fix CI.

@XuHuaiyu
Copy link
Contributor

@lwhile You can use make dev to check whether your code could pass the UTs.

@XuHuaiyu
Copy link
Contributor

FAIL: admin_test.go:204: testSuite.TestScan

admin_test.go:287:
s.testIndex(c, ctx, db.L, tb, tb.Indices()[0])
admin_test.go:356:
c.Assert(err, IsNil)
... value *errors.Err = &errors.Err{message:"", cause:(*errors.Err)(0xc420fdb040), previous:(errors.Err)(0xc420fdb040), file:"/go/src/github.com/pingcap/tidb/util/admin/admin.go", line:199} ("can not get count, sql SELECT COUNT() FROM test_admin.t USE INDEX(c) result rows 0")

@zz-jason
Copy link
Member

@lwhile any update ?

@shenli
Copy link
Member

shenli commented Mar 18, 2018

/run-all-tests

@shenli
Copy link
Member

shenli commented Mar 18, 2018

@lwhile A friendly ping. Please fix the CI.

@lwhile
Copy link
Contributor Author

lwhile commented Mar 19, 2018

@shenli Sorry, I will try to fix the errors in the next few days :)

@lwhile
Copy link
Contributor Author

lwhile commented Mar 20, 2018

@shenli Hi, I could pass all the test in my local environment by using the command make dev after I merge the latest branch master to my patch, but the online CI says

./executor/aggregate.go
Makefile:75: recipe for target 'check' failed
make: *** [check] Error 1
Exited with code 2

Could give me more tips?

@XuHuaiyu
Copy link
Contributor

You can run go fmt ./... in executor directory.

@tiancaiamao
Copy link
Contributor

What's your Go version? You need the latest Go to format the source files. @lwhile

@lwhile
Copy link
Contributor Author

lwhile commented Mar 20, 2018

Can pass the CI check now. @XuHuaiyu

Thanks for your help. I am a reader of your blog, and your article is very well. @tiancaiamao

@XuHuaiyu
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM
PTAL @zz-jason

@XuHuaiyu XuHuaiyu added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Mar 21, 2018
@@ -143,37 +143,7 @@ func (e *HashAggExec) execute(ctx context.Context) (err error) {

// Next implements the Executor Next interface.
func (e *HashAggExec) Next(ctx context.Context) (Row, error) {
Copy link
Member

@zz-jason zz-jason Mar 21, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

we can remore Next function totally now.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

removed

@zz-jason
Copy link
Member

/run-all-tests

Copy link
Member

@zz-jason zz-jason left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@zz-jason zz-jason added status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. and removed status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. labels Mar 22, 2018
@lwhile
Copy link
Contributor Author

lwhile commented Mar 22, 2018

@zz-jason The Jenkins test didn't pass.Should I fix it?

@zz-jason
Copy link
Member

@lwhile It's a known issue, not your fault, we are working on it

@zz-jason
Copy link
Member

/run-common-test
/run-integration-common-test

@zz-jason
Copy link
Member

/run-common-test
/run-integration-common-test

@zz-jason
Copy link
Member

/run-integration-common-test

@ngaut ngaut merged commit 861103b into pingcap:master Mar 22, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
contribution This PR is from a community contributor. status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants