DocValuesConsumerUtil tweak #132586
Merged
DocValuesConsumerUtil tweak #132586
Conversation
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
Be more strict about not finding a metadata entry based on field info number. If this were to happen, then this can cause issues in doc value consumer. However as far as I understand it, the field info number should stay consistent.
jordan-powers
approved these changes
Aug 8, 2025
Contributor
jordan-powers
left a comment
jordan-powers
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Makes sense to me, thanks Martijn!
Collaborator
|
Pinging @elastic/es-storage-engine (Team:StorageEngine) |
dnhatn
approved these changes
Aug 11, 2025
Member
Author
|
Thanks @jordan-powers and @dnhatn for the reviews! |
martijnvg
added a commit
to martijnvg/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 14, 2025
Be more strict about not finding a metadata entry based on field info number. If this were to happen, then this can cause issues in doc value consumer later. An example of such a failure is what is fixed via elastic#132597, here with shrinking the local segment and merged field numbers were not aligned causing serious merge errors in the tsdb doc value consumer. Currently such an issue shouldn't occur anymore.
martijnvg
added a commit
to martijnvg/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 14, 2025
Be more strict about not finding a metadata entry based on field info number. If this were to happen, then this can cause issues in doc value consumer later. An example of such a failure is what is fixed via elastic#132597, here with shrinking the local segment and merged field numbers were not aligned causing serious merge errors in the tsdb doc value consumer. Currently such an issue shouldn't occur anymore.
elasticsearchmachine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 14, 2025
Be more strict about not finding a metadata entry based on field info number. If this were to happen, then this can cause issues in doc value consumer later. An example of such a failure is what is fixed via #132597, here with shrinking the local segment and merged field numbers were not aligned causing serious merge errors in the tsdb doc value consumer. Currently such an issue shouldn't occur anymore.
elasticsearchmachine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 18, 2025
Be more strict about not finding a metadata entry based on field info number. If this were to happen, then this can cause issues in doc value consumer later. An example of such a failure is what is fixed via #132597, here with shrinking the local segment and merged field numbers were not aligned causing serious merge errors in the tsdb doc value consumer. Currently such an issue shouldn't occur anymore.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 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.
Be more strict about not finding a metadata entry based on field info number.
If this were to happen, then this can cause issues in doc value consumer later.
An example of such a failure is what is fixed via #132597, here with shrinking
the local segment and merged field numbers were not aligned causing serious
merge errors in the tsdb doc value consumer. Currently such an issue shouldn't
occur anymore.