Skip to content

Conversation

@SpadeA-Tang
Copy link
Contributor

issue: #42148

@sre-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: SpadeA-Tang
To complete the pull request process, please assign czs007 after the PR has been reviewed.
You can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @czs007 in a comment when ready.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@sre-ci-robot sre-ci-robot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines. label Nov 3, 2025
@mergify mergify bot added dco-passed DCO check passed. kind/feature Issues related to feature request from users labels Nov 3, 2025
@sre-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[ci-v2-notice]
Notice: We are gradually rolling out the new ci-v2 system.

  • Legacy CI jobs remain unaffected, you can just ignore ci-v2 if you don't want to run it.
  • Additional "ci-v2/*" checkers will run for this PR to ensure the new ci-v2 system is working as expected.
  • For tests that exist in both v1 and v2, passing in either system is considered PASS.

To rerun ci-v2 checks, comment with:

  • /ci-rerun-code-check // for ci-v2/code-check
  • /ci-rerun-build // for ci-v2/build
  • /ci-rerun-ut-integration // for ci-v2/ut-integration
  • /ci-rerun-ut-go // for ci-v2/ut-go
  • /ci-rerun-ut-cpp // for ci-v2/ut-cpp
  • /ci-rerun-ut // for all ci-v2/ut-integration, ci-v2/ut-go, ci-v2/ut-cpp
  • /ci-rerun-e2e-arm // for ci-v2/e2e-arm

If you have any questions or requests, please contact @zhikunyao.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 3, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 7.76699% with 95 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 76.82%. Comparing base (b045efc) to head (d7d2c05).
⚠️ Report is 25 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
internal/core/src/storage/DiskFileManagerImpl.cpp 0.00% 44 Missing ⚠️
internal/core/src/index/IndexFactory.cpp 18.75% 26 Missing ⚠️
internal/core/src/index/VectorDiskIndex.cpp 7.40% 25 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #45223      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   76.91%   76.82%   -0.09%     
==========================================
  Files        1844     1844              
  Lines      287704   287797      +93     
==========================================
- Hits       221280   221096     -184     
- Misses      59216    59475     +259     
- Partials     7208     7226      +18     
Components Coverage Δ
Client 78.03% <ø> (ø)
Core 83.65% <7.76%> (-0.10%) ⬇️
Go 74.95% <ø> (-0.10%) ⬇️
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
internal/core/src/index/VectorDiskIndex.h 20.00% <ø> (ø)
internal/core/src/storage/DiskFileManagerImpl.h 66.66% <ø> (ø)
...l/core/unittest/test_storage_v2_index_raw_data.cpp 100.00% <ø> (ø)
internal/core/src/index/VectorDiskIndex.cpp 66.98% <7.40%> (-8.56%) ⬇️
internal/core/src/index/IndexFactory.cpp 83.33% <18.75%> (-5.23%) ⬇️
internal/core/src/storage/DiskFileManagerImpl.cpp 61.87% <0.00%> (-5.11%) ⬇️

... and 36 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
local_data_path, write_offset, &dim, sizeof(dim));

// Write offsets file for VECTOR_ARRAY
if (is_vector_array && offsets.size() > 1) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

should we handle the error case of is_vector_array && offsets.size() == 1? is it possible for this to happen?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

offsets size equals to num_rows + 1, so it should not happen


auto segment_id = file_manager_->GetFieldDataMeta().segment_id;
auto local_data_path = file_manager_->CacheRawDataToDisk<T>(config);
auto field_id = file_manager_->GetFieldDataMeta().field_id;
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

please add some unit tests

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Opensource knowhere is not supported for this. I have tested end-to-end with cardinal, and can run normally.

Signed-off-by: SpadeA-Tang <tangchenjie1210@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: SpadeA <tangchenjie1210@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: SpadeA-Tang <tangchenjie1210@gmail.com>
@mergify mergify bot added the ci-passed label Nov 3, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

area/compilation ci-passed dco-passed DCO check passed. kind/feature Issues related to feature request from users size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines.

3 participants