Skip to content

branch-4.1: [fix](load) fix empty statistics for forwarded INSERT #64439#64453

Open
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
branch-4.1from
auto-pick-64439-branch-4.1
Open

branch-4.1: [fix](load) fix empty statistics for forwarded INSERT #64439#64453
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
branch-4.1from
auto-pick-64439-branch-4.1

Conversation

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Cherry-picked from #64439

### What problem does this PR solve?

When `INSERT INTO ... SELECT` is forwarded from a follower FE to the
master FE, `SHOW LOAD` could show an empty `JobDetails`, such as
`ScannedRows=0`, `LoadBytes=0`, `TaskNumber=0`, and empty backend lists.

The root cause is that the insert load job is registered with a real
`jobId`, but when coordinator creation falls back to the regular
`Coordinator` / `CloudCoordinator` path, that `jobId` was not passed
into the coordinator. Therefore, the coordinator kept the default
`jobId=-1` and did not initialize or update the corresponding
`LoadManager` progress. The load job was still recorded as `FINISHED`,
but its `LoadStatistic` remained empty when `SHOW LOAD` rendered
`JobDetails`.

This PR preserves the insert `jobId` in the regular `Coordinator` and
`CloudCoordinator` fallback paths, so `initJobProgress()` and
`updateJobProgress()` update the same `InsertLoadJob` that is later
recorded and displayed by `SHOW LOAD`.
@github-actions github-actions Bot requested a review from yiguolei as a code owner June 12, 2026 07:35
@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

  1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
  2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
  3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
  4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
  5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

run buildall

@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

FE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 57.14% (4/7) 🎉
Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants