Repository navigation
fix(store): harden MultiListIterator close and next #3445
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
vaidikgarg-bit
wants to merge
2
commits into
apache:master
Choose a base branch
from
vaidikgarg-bit:fix/multilist-iterator-close-contract
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+226
−6
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
next()probes the current child again after the caller has already calledhasNext(). In multi-branchscanIndexwithDEDUP,indexIntersectionsuppliesInAccurateUnionFilterIteratororInAccurateIntersectionIteratorchildren, whosehasNext()consumes and replaces the current match. The second probe skips the first row; a single-row child can instead be exhausted and causeNoSuchElementException. Please cache the prepared state betweenhasNext()andnext(), and add a regression test using a child whosehasNext()advances.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks, done.
hasNext()now records that it found an element, andnext()and repeatedhasNext()/isValid()calls use that record instead of probing the child again.testMultiListProbesAdvancingSourceOncePerRowuses a child whosehasNext()advances and replaces the pending row. It fails on the previous head, and on master too, since master'shasNext()probes the child again on every call. It passes now. This also removes the extra per-row probe I noted in the description.On impact: the extra probe in
next()came from my previous commit. Since #3424 the twoInAccurate*iterators keep their pending element (if (current != null) return true;), and the other children I checked inBusinessHandlerImplare also safe to probe twice, so I don't think it dropped rows with the current children. It did add a probe per row and relied on that idempotence, and now it doesn't.