yihua commented on code in PR #19304:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hudi/pull/19304#discussion_r4065581052
##########
hudi-client/hudi-client-common/src/main/java/org/apache/hudi/keygen/KeyGenUtils.java:
##########
@@ -436,15 +461,213 @@ public static String getComplexKeygenErrorMessage(String
operation) {
+ "`hoodie.write.complex.keygen.validation.enable=false` to skip this
validation.";
}
+ /**
+ * Whether a complex key generator with a single record key field prepends
the field name to the key.
+ *
+ * <p>{@link HoodieTableConfig#COMPLEX_KEYGEN_ENCODING} wins whenever it is
present in the properties, because
+ * it describes what the table's data carries. Otherwise the write table
version decides: 9 and above always
+ * prefix, 8 and below follow {@code
hoodie.write.complex.keygen.new.encoding}.
+ */
public static boolean
encodeSingleKeyFieldNameForComplexKeyGen(TypedProperties props) {
+ String tableEncoding =
props.getProperty(HoodieTableConfig.COMPLEX_KEYGEN_ENCODING.key());
+ if (!StringUtils.isNullOrEmpty(tableEncoding)) {
+ return
ComplexKeyGenEncoding.fromString(tableEncoding).encodesFieldName();
+ }
int tableVersionCode = ConfigUtils.getIntWithAltKeys(props,
WRITE_TABLE_VERSION);
HoodieTableVersion tableVersion =
HoodieTableVersion.fromVersionCode(tableVersionCode);
return tableVersion.greaterThanOrEquals(HoodieTableVersion.NINE)
|| !ConfigUtils.getBooleanWithAltKeys(props,
COMPLEX_KEYGEN_NEW_ENCODING);
}
- public static boolean mayUseNewEncodingForComplexKeyGen(HoodieTableConfig
tableConfig) {
- return tableConfig.getTableVersion().lesserThan(HoodieTableVersion.NINE)
- && isComplexKeyGeneratorWithSingleRecordKeyField(tableConfig);
+ /**
+ * Whether the table's record key encoding is tracked by {@link
HoodieTableConfig#COMPLEX_KEYGEN_ENCODING}:
+ * a complex key generator with a single record key field and a populated
{@code _hoodie_record_key}.
+ * Without the meta field there is no stored key whose encoding could
diverge from the key generator's.
+ */
+ public static boolean isComplexKeyGenEncodingTracked(HoodieTableConfig
tableConfig) {
+ return tableConfig.isComplexKeyGenWithSingleRecordKeyField() &&
tableConfig.isRecordKeyPopulated();
+ }
+
+ /**
+ * Records a missing complex key generator encoding before ingestion starts.
Engine entry points call this
+ * once during setup, before creating record keys. Existing data determines
the encoding under the table lock.
+ */
+ public static void
recordComplexKeygenEncodingIfMissing(HoodieTableMetaClient metaClient,
HoodieWriteConfig config) {
+ if (!isComplexKeyGenEncodingTracked(metaClient.getTableConfig())
+ || metaClient.getTableConfig().getComplexKeyGenEncoding().isPresent())
{
+ return;
+ }
+ try (TransactionManager transactionManager = new
TransactionManager(config, metaClient.getStorage())) {
Review Comment:
Could you check if this is always invoked outside the locking in write
transaction, to avoid double locking?
##########
hudi-client/hudi-client-common/src/main/java/org/apache/hudi/keygen/KeyGenUtils.java:
##########
@@ -436,15 +461,213 @@ public static String getComplexKeygenErrorMessage(String
operation) {
+ "`hoodie.write.complex.keygen.validation.enable=false` to skip this
validation.";
}
+ /**
+ * Whether a complex key generator with a single record key field prepends
the field name to the key.
+ *
+ * <p>{@link HoodieTableConfig#COMPLEX_KEYGEN_ENCODING} wins whenever it is
present in the properties, because
+ * it describes what the table's data carries. Otherwise the write table
version decides: 9 and above always
+ * prefix, 8 and below follow {@code
hoodie.write.complex.keygen.new.encoding}.
+ */
public static boolean
encodeSingleKeyFieldNameForComplexKeyGen(TypedProperties props) {
+ String tableEncoding =
props.getProperty(HoodieTableConfig.COMPLEX_KEYGEN_ENCODING.key());
+ if (!StringUtils.isNullOrEmpty(tableEncoding)) {
+ return
ComplexKeyGenEncoding.fromString(tableEncoding).encodesFieldName();
+ }
int tableVersionCode = ConfigUtils.getIntWithAltKeys(props,
WRITE_TABLE_VERSION);
HoodieTableVersion tableVersion =
HoodieTableVersion.fromVersionCode(tableVersionCode);
return tableVersion.greaterThanOrEquals(HoodieTableVersion.NINE)
|| !ConfigUtils.getBooleanWithAltKeys(props,
COMPLEX_KEYGEN_NEW_ENCODING);
}
- public static boolean mayUseNewEncodingForComplexKeyGen(HoodieTableConfig
tableConfig) {
- return tableConfig.getTableVersion().lesserThan(HoodieTableVersion.NINE)
- && isComplexKeyGeneratorWithSingleRecordKeyField(tableConfig);
+ /**
+ * Whether the table's record key encoding is tracked by {@link
HoodieTableConfig#COMPLEX_KEYGEN_ENCODING}:
+ * a complex key generator with a single record key field and a populated
{@code _hoodie_record_key}.
+ * Without the meta field there is no stored key whose encoding could
diverge from the key generator's.
+ */
+ public static boolean isComplexKeyGenEncodingTracked(HoodieTableConfig
tableConfig) {
+ return tableConfig.isComplexKeyGenWithSingleRecordKeyField() &&
tableConfig.isRecordKeyPopulated();
+ }
+
+ /**
+ * Records a missing complex key generator encoding before ingestion starts.
Engine entry points call this
+ * once during setup, before creating record keys. Existing data determines
the encoding under the table lock.
+ */
+ public static void
recordComplexKeygenEncodingIfMissing(HoodieTableMetaClient metaClient,
HoodieWriteConfig config) {
+ if (!isComplexKeyGenEncodingTracked(metaClient.getTableConfig())
+ || metaClient.getTableConfig().getComplexKeyGenEncoding().isPresent())
{
+ return;
+ }
+ try (TransactionManager transactionManager = new
TransactionManager(config, metaClient.getStorage())) {
Review Comment:
Could we remove this locking as it's fail-safe? Does table config update
always require locking?
--
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]
