codecov-commenter commented on PR #8972:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8972#issuecomment-1165267539
#
[Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/pinot/pull/8972?src=pr&el=h1&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=The+Apache+Softwar
gortiz commented on code in PR #8884:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8884#discussion_r905781568
##
pinot-common/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/common/utils/DataTable.java:
##
@@ -113,6 +113,9 @@ enum MetadataKey {
SYSTEM_ACTIVITIES_CPU_TIME_NS("systemActivitiesCp
lksvenoy-r7 opened a new issue, #8973:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/issues/8973
Currently nothing stops developers from defining segment relocation in their
upsert tables using the instanceAssignmentConfigMap. From discussions in the
Pinot slack group, it's become apparent that this
codecov-commenter commented on PR #8961:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8961#issuecomment-1165320531
#
[Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/pinot/pull/8961?src=pr&el=h1&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=The+Apache+Softwar
Jackie-Jiang commented on issue #8973:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/issues/8973#issuecomment-1165472711
We already have the check for realtime to offline task. We should also add
the check for the segment relocation. Do you want to help contribute this? The
check can be added to `Ta
Harnoor-se7en opened a new issue, #8974:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/issues/8974
**Why do we need this?**
We are observing a significant difference in the `SCATTER_GATHER` timer
metric value at the broker layer and the `TOTAL_QUERY_TIME` timer metric value
at the server layer.
Jackie-Jiang commented on PR #8911:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8911#issuecomment-1165733880
+1 on maintaining the freshness lag for each table at ingestion time, which
is independent of the segments queried. We might also consider maintaining it
for each partition
--
This
Jackie-Jiang commented on code in PR #8953:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8953#discussion_r906222092
##
pinot-segment-spi/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/segment/spi/index/reader/ForwardIndexReader.java:
##
@@ -410,9 +421,303 @@ default byte[] getBytes(int docId, T co
Jackie-Jiang commented on code in PR #8953:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8953#discussion_r906222092
##
pinot-segment-spi/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/segment/spi/index/reader/ForwardIndexReader.java:
##
@@ -410,9 +421,303 @@ default byte[] getBytes(int docId, T co
Jackie-Jiang commented on code in PR #8953:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8953#discussion_r906222092
##
pinot-segment-spi/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/segment/spi/index/reader/ForwardIndexReader.java:
##
@@ -410,9 +421,303 @@ default byte[] getBytes(int docId, T co
mcvsubbu commented on PR #8911:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8911#issuecomment-1165754151
> +1 on maintaining the freshness lag for each table at ingestion time,
which is independent of the segments queried. We might also consider
maintaining it for each partition
There
somandal commented on code in PR #8953:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8953#discussion_r906253811
##
pinot-segment-spi/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/segment/spi/index/reader/ForwardIndexReader.java:
##
@@ -410,9 +421,303 @@ default byte[] getBytes(int docId, T contex
somandal commented on code in PR #8953:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8953#discussion_r906271033
##
pinot-segment-spi/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/segment/spi/index/reader/ForwardIndexReader.java:
##
@@ -100,6 +100,17 @@ default int getDictIdMV(int docId, int[] dic
vvivekiyer commented on code in PR #8907:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8907#discussion_r906276792
##
pinot-broker/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/broker/requesthandler/BaseBrokerRequestHandler.java:
##
@@ -682,7 +697,8 @@ private void logBrokerResponse(long requestId
vvivekiyer commented on code in PR #8907:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8907#discussion_r906279935
##
pinot-broker/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/broker/requesthandler/BaseBrokerRequestHandler.java:
##
@@ -453,8 +455,13 @@ private BrokerResponseNative handleRequest(l
codecov-commenter commented on PR #8953:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8953#issuecomment-1165819411
#
[Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/pinot/pull/8953?src=pr&el=h1&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=The+Apache+Softwar
navina commented on PR #8941:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8941#issuecomment-1165823464
@npawar can you merge this PR?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific co
amrishlal commented on code in PR #8965:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8965#discussion_r906302354
##
pinot-controller/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/controller/recommender/data/generator/JsonGenerator.java:
##
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+/**
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software
amrishlal commented on code in PR #8965:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8965#discussion_r906302998
##
pinot-controller/src/test/java/org/apache/pinot/controller/recommender/data/generator/JsonGeneratorTest.java:
##
@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+/**
+ * Licensed to the Apache Soft
amrishlal commented on code in PR #8965:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8965#discussion_r906303168
##
pinot-controller/src/test/java/org/apache/pinot/controller/recommender/data/generator/JsonGeneratorTest.java:
##
@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+/**
+ * Licensed to the Apache Soft
npawar merged PR #8941:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8941
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@pinot.apache.
This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
nehapawar pushed a change to branch master
in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/pinot.git
from 47c637c38c make all search bars full width (#8957)
add 6582750ea6 Defined a new broker metric for total query p
dang-stripe commented on issue #8948:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/issues/8948#issuecomment-1165863197
Thanks for following up - we already fixed the segments by deleting them so
can't easily reproduce atm. I looked at the code and it seems like we'd hit
this block?
https://github.
amrishlal commented on PR #8965:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8965#issuecomment-1165918510
> Can we add a test case in
`org.apache.pinot.controller.recommender.TestConfigEngine` to test segment
generation in an actual recommender run? We can follow the
`SegmentSizeRuleInput.js
abhs50 commented on code in PR #8907:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8907#discussion_r906395996
##
pinot-broker/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/broker/requesthandler/BaseBrokerRequestHandler.java:
##
@@ -453,8 +455,13 @@ private BrokerResponseNative handleRequest(long
navina opened a new pull request, #8975:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8975
Adding a constructor override for convenience
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific
26 matches
Mail list logo