Skip to content

update submodule#171

Merged
lokax merged 4 commits intoeloqdata:eloq-10.6.10from
lokax:yf-scan-ci
Nov 27, 2025
Merged

update submodule#171
lokax merged 4 commits intoeloqdata:eloq-10.6.10from
lokax:yf-scan-ci

Conversation

@lokax
Copy link
Collaborator

@lokax lokax commented Nov 26, 2025

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores

    • Updated an internal storage submodule.
  • Bug Fixes / Internal Behavior

    • Adjusted unique-key batch processing to include an object-type marker in batch entries; control flow and public behavior remain unchanged.

✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.

@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 26, 2025

Caution

Review failed

The pull request is closed.

Walkthrough

Updates the storage/eloq/tx_service submodule pointer and inserts an object_type field (value -1) into batch-tuple constructions in storage/eloq/ha_eloq.cc, propagated for unique-key and index-scan batch creation paths.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Change Summary
Submodule Update
storage/eloq/tx_service
Updated submodule commit reference from 7e38a11f4f8dafe6e6c38fa7f10c83c48412699c to 4116a40315ee80f38cf39db1a8f00accbe750ca1.
ha_eloq batch tuple updates
storage/eloq/ha_eloq.cc
Add object_type field set to -1 to BulkUniqueCheck::batch_tuples and propagate -1 when constructing tmp_scan_batch and sk_pk_scan_batch_ entries in SkIndexScanNext (additional param after version_ts_ / as final param).

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Caller
    participant HaEloq as ha_eloq.cc
    participant TxService as tx_service (submodule)

    Note over Caller,HaEloq: SkIndexScanNext / Unique-key processing
    Caller->>HaEloq: request scan / unique check
    HaEloq->>HaEloq: build batch tuple (key, record, status, version_ts_)
    alt New change: include object_type
        HaEloq->>HaEloq: append object_type = -1 to tuple (new arity)
    end
    HaEloq->>TxService: send batch (includes object_type)
    TxService-->>HaEloq: process results
    HaEloq-->>Caller: return scan/unique-check results
Loading

Estimated code review effort

🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes

  • Review areas:
    • storage/eloq/ha_eloq.cc — confirm ordering/serialization of the added object_type and compatibility with receivers.
    • storage/eloq/tx_service submodule — verify the referenced commit exposes the updated batch-tuple arity and matching interfaces.
    • Any consumers/deserializers of batch tuples that assume the previous tuple arity.

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

trigger-ci

Suggested reviewers

  • lzxddz

Poem

🐇 I nibble bytes beneath the moonlit run,
A tiny field added — now it's done.
Tuples tagged with minus-one, submodule hopped,
I twitch my whiskers, then I softly stop. 🥕

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

❌ Failed checks (1 warning, 1 inconclusive)
Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Docstring Coverage ⚠️ Warning Docstring coverage is 33.33% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. You can run @coderabbitai generate docstrings to improve docstring coverage.
Title check ❓ Inconclusive The title 'update submodule' is vague and generic. While it relates to a submodule update, it does not clearly communicate the actual changes in the pull request, which include modifications to ha_eloq.cc and a submodule commit update. Consider a more descriptive title that reflects the main changes, such as 'Add object_type field to batch tuple processing in ha_eloq.cc and update tx_service submodule' or similar, to clearly convey what is being modified.
✅ Passed checks (1 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 95c4deb and 81a7786.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • storage/eloq/tx_service (1 hunks)

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

♻️ Duplicate comments (2)
storage/eloq/ha_eloq.cc (2)

6860-6866: Same object_type_ = -1 concern as noted earlier

This tmp_scan_batch.emplace_back(..., tuple.version_ts_, -1, ...) follows the same pattern as the earlier object_type_ initialization; see the prior comment about using a named constant/enum instead of a bare -1.


6894-6898: Consistent handling of object_type_

This use of -1 for object_type_ matches the other updated call sites; the same suggestion about replacing the magic value with a symbolic constant/enum applies here as well.

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
storage/eloq/ha_eloq.cc (1)

5794-5805: Initialize object_type_ and avoid magic sentinel

Setting batch_tuples.at(idx).object_type_ = -1; when reusing entries is correct and prevents leaking stale values from previous batches. To make the meaning of -1 clear and keep callers consistent, consider introducing a named constant or enum (e.g. constexpr int kObjectTypeUnknown = -1;) and using it here and at the other call sites that pass -1.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between f96b86a and 1b56c3c.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • storage/eloq/ha_eloq.cc (3 hunks)

@lokax lokax removed the trigger-ci label Nov 27, 2025
@lokax lokax merged commit 1258d98 into eloqdata:eloq-10.6.10 Nov 27, 2025
1 of 2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants