xiangfu0 commented on code in PR #18475:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/18475#discussion_r3226338111
##########
pinot-core/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/core/query/killing/QueryKillReport.java:
##########
@@ -121,13 +128,13 @@ public long getElapsedTimeMs() {
*/
public String toCustomerMessage() {
return String.format(
- "Query '%s' on table '%s' was killed because '%s' (%,d) exceeded the
threshold (%,d) "
+ "Query '%s' (requestId=%d) on table '%s' was killed because '%s' (%,d)
exceeded the threshold (%,d) "
+ "configured in %s. "
+ "At kill time: entriesScannedInFilter=%,d, docsScanned=%,d, "
+ "entriesScannedPostFilter=%,d, elapsedMs=%d. "
Review Comment:
[HIGH] Reporting `entriesScannedPostFilter` here makes the feature look
wired end-to-end, but this PR never actually makes that metric meaningful. None
of the new operator instrumentation calls
`QueryScanCostContext.addEntriesScannedPostFilter()`, and the default
`ScanEntriesThresholdStrategy` still ignores the corresponding cluster/table
thresholds. Any deployment that sets `maxEntriesScannedPostFilter` will
therefore get a silent no-op guardrail while this message still prints the
field. Please either plumb post-filter accounting through the operators and
strategy, or drop the advertised threshold from this change.
--
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]
