Hi, I've prepared a patch for this feature. Can anybody have a look at it?
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/9167 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13364 On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 12:14 PM Maksim Timonin <timonin.ma...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, I've left a comment in your PR, could you please have a look? > > On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 6:09 AM 18624049226 <18624049...@163.com> wrote: > >> Hello team, >> >> I think this is a very valuable optimization. This patch has been >> developed for a long time, I don't think there is any reason to continue >> to delay the release of this patch to version 2.12. >> Is anyone willing to push this forward and merge this patch into the >> master? >> >> 2021/1/27 δΈε4:52, Maxim Muzafarov ει: >> > Stanislav, >> > >> >> I think the most compatibility impact will be on the in-memory caches >> with SQL and without explicitly specified inline sizes. >> > I don't think that this is `true` compatibility issue. But I think we >> > should at least mentioned it on our documentation pages and in the >> > release notes. So, I'm +1 to proceed with the merge. >> > >> > Should we include the issue into 2.10 release? >> > >> > On Fri, 8 Jan 2021 at 16:50, Stanislav Lukyanov <stanlukya...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Igniters, >> >> >> >> I'd like to discuss the change implemented by Evgeniy Rudenko in the >> ticket https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13364. >> >> I see that the fix is ready for review and merging, and I'm interested >> in it so I'd like to pick it up on the last mile. >> >> I also wanted to bring community's attention to it before the merge as >> it changes the default behavior. >> >> >> >> The patch changes how SQL index inline size is calculated. >> >> >> >> Specifically: >> >> >> >> 1. When inline size is calculated for a variable-sized field, a >> constant 10 (configurable via IGNITE_VARIABLE_TYPE_DEFAULT_INDEX_SIZE) is >> added to the calculated size instead of setting the entire calculation >> result to 10. >> >> For example, consider the following cases >> >> >> >> Index (int, int, string) >> >> Before the change: inline size = 10 >> >> After the change: inline size = 5 + 5 + 10 = 20 >> >> >> >> Index (long, long, long, long, string) >> >> Before the change: inline size = 10 >> >> After the change: inline size = 9 + 9 + 9 + 9 + 10 = 46 >> >> >> >> 2. If there is a VARCHAR_FIXED, e.g. VARCHAR(5), then instead of the >> default IGNITE_VARIABLE_TYPE_DEFAULT_INDEX_SIZE Ignite will use the value >> provided in the calculation >> >> >> >> 3. If the calculated size exceeds >> IGNITE_MAX_INDEX_PAYLOAD_SIZE_DEFAULT=64, it will be truncated to 64. >> >> >> >> All of this only affects calculated inline sizes of new indexes. >> >> Existing indexes should not be affected. >> >> Indexes with explicitly specified inline size should not be affected. >> >> >> >> I think the most compatibility impact will be on the in-memory caches >> with SQL and without explicitly specified inline sizes. >> >> After the upgrade these caches may slightly increase in size (because >> the inline is likely to become bigger) while SQL is also likely to become >> faster. >> >> >> >> Please comment. >> >> If there are no concerns, I'll proceed with finding a committer to >> review and merge the fix at the end of the next week. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Stan >> >
