[fix](cloud) Avoid deleting nonexistent delete bitmap files#62967
Merged
gavinchou merged 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom May 6, 2026
Merged
[fix](cloud) Avoid deleting nonexistent delete bitmap files#62967gavinchou merged 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom
gavinchou merged 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom
Conversation
wyxxxcat
requested review from
dataroaring,
gavinchou and
w41ter
as code owners
Contributor
|
Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris. Please clearly describe your PR:
|
wyxxxcat
force-pushed
the
recycle_packed_file_with_dbm
branch
from
4cf09d0 to
e3cfe04
Compare
Collaborator
Author
|
run buildall |
github-actions
Bot
added
the
approved
Contributor
|
PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested. |
Contributor
|
PR approved by anyone and no changes requested. |
w41ter
approved these changes
May 6, 2026
github-actions Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 6, 2026
When recycling rowset data, the recycler treated a missing versioned delete bitmap meta key as "not packed" and added the standalone delete bitmap object path to the delete_files request. This caused unnecessary delete object requests for `<rowset_id>_delete_bitmap.db` even when no delete bitmap storage metadata existed. The fix makes delete bitmap storage handling explicit: missing meta, FDB storage, standalone file storage, and packed file storage are distinguished. The recycler now only deletes `<rowset_id>_delete_bitmap.db` when the metadata explicitly indicates a standalone delete bitmap file.
github-actions Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 6, 2026
When recycling rowset data, the recycler treated a missing versioned delete bitmap meta key as "not packed" and added the standalone delete bitmap object path to the delete_files request. This caused unnecessary delete object requests for `<rowset_id>_delete_bitmap.db` even when no delete bitmap storage metadata existed. The fix makes delete bitmap storage handling explicit: missing meta, FDB storage, standalone file storage, and packed file storage are distinguished. The recycler now only deletes `<rowset_id>_delete_bitmap.db` when the metadata explicitly indicates a standalone delete bitmap file.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What problem does this PR solve?
When recycling rowset data, the recycler treated a missing versioned delete bitmap meta key as "not packed" and added the standalone delete bitmap object path to the delete_files request. This caused unnecessary delete object requests for
<rowset_id>_delete_bitmap.dbeven when no delete bitmap storage metadata existed.The fix makes delete bitmap storage handling explicit: missing meta, FDB storage, standalone file storage, and packed file storage are distinguished. The recycler now only deletes
<rowset_id>_delete_bitmap.dbwhen the metadata explicitly indicates a standalone delete bitmap file.Issue Number: close #xxx
Related PR: #xxx
Problem Summary:
Release note
None
Check List (For Author)
Test
Behavior changed:
Does this need documentation?
Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR)