yujun777 commented on PR #68390:
URL: https://github.com/apache/doris/pull/68390#issuecomment-5810708128

   Answering the summary review at `6c6f79d5403`. Both threads it names as 
still unresolved are addressed in 8934d283cc4; the third is left open on 
purpose.
   
   - The strict-`PARTITIONS` refusal being unreachable behind the 
initial-refresh shortcut was this PR's hole -- the two rules answer COMPLETE 
and the one that refuses ran second. Judged first now, with a unit test that 
asserts both that the shortcut is active in that state and that the request is 
refused.
   - The generic `processBaseTableChange -> Env.alterMTMVStatus` path applied 
the status under the lock and enqueued after releasing it. Fixed, though the 
path predates this PR (`git blame`: 2023-11-24): it now goes through 
`MTMV.invalidateWholeMv`, the shape this PR introduced and the one the sibling 
invalidation in the same loop already uses, and `Env.alterMTMVStatus` is 
deleted. Same state, same detail, byte-identical payload, replay untouched; the 
DDL now awaits the record, which those sibling branches already do.
   - STOP's `cancel(false)` is left open with the reasoning on the thread: it 
is the job framework's cancel semantics, shared by every job type, and the 
accumulator-publication half the finding named is fixed.
   
   The PR description is refreshed: the `refreshEpoch == 0` exemption and the 
"a rename no longer moves it out of `NORMAL`" claim are gone, the 
behaviour-changed list and the release note carry the routing changes, and the 
test section names the new suite.
   


-- 
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