Hi Igniters,
Earlier we discuss about columns for running queries. Let's summarize it
and continue discussion for not closed questions.
What we had:
*name of view**: *running_queries
*columns and meaning*:
query_id - unique id of query on node
node_id - initial node of request.
sql - text of query
schema_name - name of sql schema
duration - duration in milliseconds from start of
execution.
All of this columns are clear, except query_id.
Let's keep in mind that the query_id column of the view coupled with KILL
QUERY command.
We have the following variants what is query_id:
1) It's string, internally with two parts separated by '.'(it can be other
separator): numeric node order and numeric query counter unique for local
node, e.g. '172.67321'. For this case query id will be really unique across
a cluster, but can be looks a strange for a user, especially in case we
will have ability to kill all queries on a node, when user should get first
part before separator to use it, e.g. KILL QUERY '172.*'.
2) Just single numeric id, unique for local node, e.g '127'. In this case
we need more complicated syntax for further KILL QUERY command, which lead
to use two columns from the view, e.g. KILL QUERY WHERE nodeId=
37d7afd8-b87d-4aa1-b3d1-c1c033800000 and queryId=67321
3) Use base16String(concat(node,".",queryID) as query id, e.g. '
3132332E393337'. Then we hide internal structure of id and such id will be
unique across a cluster. However we will need use complicated syntax for
KILL QUERY command as for 2nd case.
4) Just single numeric id, unique for local node, e.g '127'. But user
should use two columns to merge it and create query id unique in a cluster.
Such approach use by Oracle:ALTER SYSTEM CANCEL SQL 'SID, SERIAL, SQL_ID'.
In this case user will know real meaning of each part of passed parameter
for KILL QUERY command. But it hard to use.
5) Any other approach you can think of....
If be honestly I prefer first variant, it looks simple to use by user (it
require read a docs, but any case it required for any use cases).
Lets discuss it again and chose better approach to expose query_id column
for Ignite. Also confirm list of columns.
вт, 27 нояб. 2018 г. в 11:00, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com>:
> Yes ("нуы")
>
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 10:56 AM Павлухин Иван <vololo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I believe that the meaning was:
> >
> > > I propose to start with running queries VIEW first.
> > вт, 27 нояб. 2018 г. в 10:47, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com>:
> > >
> > > I propose to start with running queries мшуц first. Once we have it, it
> > > will be easier to agree on final command syntax.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 9:32 AM Павлухин Иван <vololo...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > May be I am a little bit late with my thoughts about a command
> syntax.
> > > > How do I see it is going to be used:
> > > > 1. A user is able to kill a query by unique id belonging only to this
> > > > query.
> > > > 2. A user is able to kill all queries started by a specific node.
> > > > For killing a single query we must identify it by unique id which is
> > > > going to be received directly from Ignite (e.g. running queries view)
> > > > and not calculated by user. Internally the id is compound but why
> > > > cannot we convert it to opaque integer or string which hides real
> > > > structure? E.g. base16String(concat(nodeOrder.toString(), ".",
> > > > queryIdOnNode.toString())) The syntax could be KILL QUERY '123' or
> > > > KILL QUERY WHERE queryId = '123'
> > > > For killing all queries started by some node we need to use only node
> > > > order (or id). It could be like KILL QUERY WHERE nodeOrder = 34.
> > > > чт, 22 нояб. 2018 г. в 12:56, Denis Mekhanikov <
> dmekhani...@gmail.com
> > >:
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually, option with separate parameters was mentioned in another
> > thread
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/proposed-design-for-thin-client-SQL-management-and-monitoring-view-running-queries-and-kill-it-tp37713p38056.html
> > > > >
> > > > > Denis
> > > > >
> > > > > чт, 22 нояб. 2018 г. в 08:51, Vladimir Ozerov <
> voze...@gridgain.com
> > >:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Denis,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Problems with separate parameters are explained above.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > чт, 22 нояб. 2018 г. в 3:23, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Vladimir,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > All of the alternatives are reminiscent of mathematical
> > operations.
> > > > Don't
> > > > > > > look like a SQL command. What if we use a SQL approach
> > introducing
> > > > named
> > > > > > > parameters:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > KILL QUERY query_id=10 [AND node_id=5]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Denis
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 4:11 AM Vladimir Ozerov <
> > > > voze...@gridgain.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Denis,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Space is bad candidate because it is a whitespace. Without
> > > > whitespaces
> > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > can have syntax without quotes at all. Any non-whitespace
> > delimiter
> > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > work, though:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > KILL QUERY 45.1
> > > > > > > > KILL QUERY 45-1
> > > > > > > > KILL QUERY 45:1
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 3:06 PM Юрий <
> > jury.gerzhedow...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Denis,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Let's consider parameter of KILL QUERY just a string with
> > some
> > > > query
> > > > > > > id,
> > > > > > > > > without any meaning for user. User just need to get the id
> > and
> > > > pass
> > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > parameter to KILL QUERY command.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Even if query is distributed it have single query id from
> > user
> > > > > > > > perspective
> > > > > > > > > and will killed on all nodes. User just need to known one
> > global
> > > > > > query
> > > > > > > > id.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > How it can works.
> > > > > > > > > 1)SELECT * from running_queries
> > > > > > > > > result is
> > > > > > > > > query_id | node_id
> > > > > > > > > | sql | schema_name | connection_id |
> > duration
> > > > > > > > > 123.33 | e0a69cb8-a1a8-45f6-b84d-ead367a00000 |
> SELECT
> > > > ... |
> > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > > > | 22 | 23456
> > > > > > > > > 333.31 | aaa6acb8-a4a5-42f6-f842-ead111b00020 |
> > > > UPDATE... |
> > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > > > | 321 | 3467777
> > > > > > > > > 2) KILL QUERY '123.33'
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > So, user need select query_id from running_queries view and
> > use
> > > > it
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > KILL
> > > > > > > > > QUERY command.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I hope it became clearer.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ср, 21 нояб. 2018 г. в 02:11, Denis Magda <
> dma...@apache.org
> > >:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Folks,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The decimal syntax is really odd - KILL QUERY
> > > > > > > > > > '[node_order].[query_counter]'
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Confusing, let's use a space to separate parameters.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Also, what if I want to halt a specific query with
> certain
> > ID?
> > > > > > Don't
> > > > > > > > know
> > > > > > > > > > the node number, just know that the query is distributed
> > and
> > > > runs
> > > > > > > > across
> > > > > > > > > > several machines. Sounds like the syntax still should
> > consider
> > > > > > > > > > [node_order/id] as an optional parameter.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Probably, if you explain to me how an end user will use
> > this
> > > > > > command
> > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > > > the very beginning (how do I look for a query id and node
> > id,
> > > > etc)
> > > > > > > then
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > things get clearer.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > Denis
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 1:03 AM Юрий <
> > > > jury.gerzhedow...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi Vladimir,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for your suggestion to use MANAGEMENT_POOL for
> > > > processing
> > > > > > > > > > > cancellation requests.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > About your questions.
> > > > > > > > > > > 1) I'm going to implements SQL view to provide list of
> > > > running
> > > > > > > > queries.
> > > > > > > > > > The
> > > > > > > > > > > SQL VIEW has been a little bit discussed earlier.
> > Proposed
> > > > name
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > *running_queries* with following columns: query_id,
> > node_id,
> > > > sql,
> > > > > > > > > > > schema_name, connection_id, duration. Currently most of
> > the
> > > > > > > > information
> > > > > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > > > be retrieved through cache API, however it doesn't
> > matter,
> > > > any
> > > > > > > case
> > > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > > > need to expose SQL VIEW. Seem's you are right - the
> part
> > > > should
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > > > implemented firstly.
> > > > > > > > > > > 2) Fully agree that we need to support all kind of SQL
> > > > queries
> > > > > > > > > > > (SLECT/DML/DDL, transactional, non transnational,
> local,
> > > > > > > > distributed).
> > > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > > definitely sure that it will possible for all of above,
> > > > however
> > > > > > I'm
> > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > > > sure about DDL - need to investigate it deeper. Also
> > need to
> > > > > > > > understand
> > > > > > > > > > > that canceled DML operation can lead to partially
> updated
> > > > data
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > non
> > > > > > > > > > > transational caches.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > пн, 19 нояб. 2018 г. в 19:17, Vladimir Ozerov <
> > > > > > > voze...@gridgain.com
> > > > > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Yuriy,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I think we can use MANAGEMENT_POOL for this. It is
> > already
> > > > used
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > some
> > > > > > > > > > > > internal Ignite tasks, and it appears to be a good
> > > > candidate to
> > > > > > > > > process
> > > > > > > > > > > > cancel requests.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > But there are several things which are not clear
> enough
> > > > for me
> > > > > > at
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > moment:
> > > > > > > > > > > > 1) How user is going to get the list of running
> > queries in
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > first
> > > > > > > > > > > place?
> > > > > > > > > > > > Do we already have any SQL commands/views to get this
> > > > > > > information?
> > > > > > > > > > > > 2) We need to ensure that KILL command will be
> > processed
> > > > > > properly
> > > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > > > > > > kinds of SQL queries - SELECT/DML/DDL,
> > non-transactional or
> > > > > > > > > > > transactional,
> > > > > > > > > > > > local queries and distributed queries. Will we be
> able
> > to
> > > > > > support
> > > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > > > > > these
> > > > > > > > > > > > modes?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Vladimir.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 6:37 PM Юрий <
> > > > > > > jury.gerzhedow...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Igniters,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Earlier we agreed about syntax KILL QUERY
> > > > > > > > > > > '[node_order].[query_counter]',
> > > > > > > > > > > > > e.g. KILL QUERY '25.123' for single query or KILL
> > QUERY
> > > > > > '25.*'
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > > > > > > > queries on the node. Which is part of IEP-29
> > > > > > > > > > > > > <
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-29%3A+SQL+management+and+monitoring
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > .
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Now I want to discuss internal realization of KILL
> > query
> > > > > > > feature.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > My current vision is following:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > After parsing, Ignite create KILL query command
> with
> > two
> > > > > > > > > parameters:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > nodeOrderId, nodeQryId. To determine that need to
> > kill
> > > > all
> > > > > > > > queries
> > > > > > > > > > on a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > node we can use negative value of query id, due to
> > qry id
> > > > > > > always
> > > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > > > > positive values.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > The command process at IgniteH2Indexing as native
> > > > command.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > By nodeOrderId we find node which initial for the
> > query
> > > > and
> > > > > > > send
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > node new GridQueryKillRequest with nodeQryId to
> > > > TOPIC_QUERY
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > > > > QUERY
> > > > > > > > > > > > > POOL executor.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > At GridReduceQueryExecutor we add support of
> > processing
> > > > new
> > > > > > > > > > > > > GridQueryKillRequest
> > > > > > > > > > > > > which just run already exists cancelQueries method
> > with
> > > > given
> > > > > > > > qryId
> > > > > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > > > > > all qryIds which currently running at the node in
> > case at
> > > > > > > initial
> > > > > > > > > > KILL
> > > > > > > > > > > > > QUERY parameters used star symbol.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I have a doubt which of thread pool we should use
> to
> > > > process
> > > > > > > > > > > > > GridQueryKillRequest.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > My opinion it shouldn't be QUERY pool, due to the
> > pool
> > > > can be
> > > > > > > > fully
> > > > > > > > > > > used
> > > > > > > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > > > > > > executing queries, it such case we can't cancel
> query
> > > > > > > > immediately.
> > > > > > > > > > May
> > > > > > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > > > > > use one of already existed pool or create new one?
> Or
> > > > may be
> > > > > > > I'm
> > > > > > > > > > > mistaken
> > > > > > > > > > > > > and it should use QUERY pool.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think about proposed plan of
> > implementation?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > And please give comments about which of thread pool
> > will
> > > > be
> > > > > > > > better
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > use
> > > > > > > > > > > > > for kill query requests. It's small, but really
> > important
> > > > > > part
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > realization.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Живи с улыбкой! :D
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > Живи с улыбкой! :D
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Живи с улыбкой! :D
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Ivan Pavlukhin
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Ivan Pavlukhin
> >
>
--
Живи с улыбкой! :D
