scheduler(ticdc): fix invlaid checkpoint when redo enabled #9851
Conversation
ti-chi-bot
bot
added
needs-cherry-pick-release-6.5
CharlesCheung96
requested review from
3AceShowHand,
asddongmen and
nongfushanquan
| @@ -604,6 +601,7 @@ LOOP2: | |||
| return err | |||
| } | |||
| if c.redoMetaMgr.Enabled() { | |||
| c.resolvedTs = c.redoMetaMgr.GetFlushedMeta().ResolvedTs | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if it is a new changefeed , what is the value of resolved ts (meta) stored in s3? or is there always a meta value in s3 in this line?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The meta file is created when the redoMetaManager is initialized, ref: https://github.com/pingcap/tiflow/blob/master/cdc/redo/meta_manager.go#L206-L208.
So, if it is a new changefeed, the value of meta will be equal to startTs.
| @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ func (b *basicScheduler) Name() string { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| func (b *basicScheduler) Schedule( | |||
| checkpointTs model.Ts, | |||
| checkpointTs tablepb.Checkpoint, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why not changing the variables name 'checkpointTs" to 'checkpoint' too?
| @@ -140,16 +140,16 @@ func (b *basicScheduler) Schedule( | |||
| // newBurstAddTables add each new table to captures in a round-robin way. | |||
| func newBurstAddTables( | |||
| changefeedID model.ChangeFeedID, | |||
| checkpointTs model.Ts, newSpans []tablepb.Span, captureIDs []model.CaptureID, | |||
| checkpointTs tablepb.Checkpoint, newSpans []tablepb.Span, captureIDs []model.CaptureID, | |||
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: hicqu, nongfushanquan 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 |
ti-chi-bot
bot
added
approved
and removed
needs-1-more-lgtm
[LGTM Timeline notifier]Timeline:
|
ti-chi-bot
bot
added
size/XXL
|
/retest |
|
In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created to branch |
Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <[email protected]>
|
In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created to branch |
…ingcap#9851) (pingcap#9907)" This reverts commit bef3924.
…ingcap#9851)" This reverts commit 3b8d55b.
…ingcap#9851)" This reverts commit 3b8d55b.
What problem does this PR solve?
Issue Number: close #9830, close #9774
What is changed and how it works?
Check List
Tests
Questions
Will it cause performance regression or break compatibility?
Do you need to update user documentation, design documentation or monitoring documentation?
Release note