ByteYue opened a new pull request, #16553:
URL: https://github.com/apache/doris/pull/16553

   # Proposed changes
   
   Issue Number: close #xxx
   There were `cooldownttl` and `cooldownttlms` in StoragePolicy, it's so 
error-prone because they served nearly the same.
   For example, the `init` function would only assign the ttl timestamp to 
`cooldownttl`, which would end up pushing cooldownttl 0 to be.
   
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/43750022/217737421-c83f3a6e-a0f8-48d4-89ea-9ec67e789762.png)
   
   
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/43750022/217737660-6fda84ab-3618-419f-9138-4dbdec82cec3.png)
   
   BTW, the former logic would record microsecond but would push seconds to be, 
so I changed the time unit to second.
   
   ## Problem summary
   
   Describe your changes.
   
   ## Checklist(Required)
   
   1. Does it affect the original behavior: 
       - [ ] Yes
       - [x] No
       - [ ] I don't know
   2. Has unit tests been added:
       - [ ] Yes
       - [x] No
       - [ ] No Need
   3. Has document been added or modified:
       - [ ] Yes
       - [x] No
       - [ ] No Need
   4. Does it need to update dependencies:
       - [ ] Yes
       - [x] No
   5. Are there any changes that cannot be rolled back:
       - [ ] Yes (If Yes, please explain WHY)
       - [x] No
   
   ## Further comments
   
   If this is a relatively large or complex change, kick off the discussion at 
[[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) by explaining why you 
chose the solution you did and what alternatives you considered, etc...
   
   


-- 
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: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to