-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
feat(ENG-373): add configurable table_scope to FunctionNode and OperatorNode #129
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
6d066b7
feat(ENG-373): add configurable table_scope flag to FunctionNode and …
kurodo3[bot] 7b11582
refactor: address PR review comments on table_scope implementation
kurodo3[bot] 9899000
fix: address record ID collision and hardening in pipeline_hash table…
kurodo3[bot] 3e6d851
refactor: simplify operator row hash by appending NODE_CONTENT_HASH_C…
kurodo3[bot] 2ee2c90
fix: update stale dedup comment; vectorize entry_id filter in get_cac…
kurodo3[bot] 1066537
style: address eywalker review comments — cleanup and consistency fixes
kurodo3[bot] File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
NODE_CONTENT_HASH_COLis written per row, but the pipeline DB record ID (entry_id) is still computed from just (tag + system tags + input packet hash). Intable_scope="pipeline_hash"mode the table is shared across runs, so overlapping inputs across runs will collide on the sameentry_id; the second run will skip writing its row, and_filter_by_content_hash()will then hide the first run’s row—losing provenance for the second run. Consider making the pipeline record ID run-scoped whenself._table_scope == "pipeline_hash"(e.g., includeself.content_hash()in the entry ID or use a composite key) so identical packets can be recorded for multiple runs in the shared table.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fixed in
FunctionNode.compute_pipeline_entry_id. Whentable_scope='pipeline_hash', the node'scontent_hash()is appended as an extra column to the table being hashed, making the resulting entry ID run-scoped. This means two runs processing the same(tag, input_packet)produce distinct pipeline records in the shared table instead of the second run's record being silently skipped by the duplicate check.