Skip to content

Storages: downgrade some logs (#10815)#10839

Open
ti-chi-bot wants to merge 1 commit intopingcap:release-8.5from
ti-chi-bot:cherry-pick-10815-to-release-8.5
Open

Storages: downgrade some logs (#10815)#10839
ti-chi-bot wants to merge 1 commit intopingcap:release-8.5from
ti-chi-bot:cherry-pick-10815-to-release-8.5

Conversation

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot commented May 9, 2026

This is an automated cherry-pick of #10815

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #10816

Problem Summary:

What is changed and how it works?


Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  • No code

Side effects

  • Performance regression: Consumes more CPU
  • Performance regression: Consumes more Memory
  • Breaking backward compatibility

Documentation

  • Affects user behaviors
  • Contains syntax changes
  • Contains variable changes
  • Contains experimental features
  • Changes MySQL compatibility

Release note

None

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Adjusted internal logging verbosity to reduce diagnostic log volume.

Note: This release contains no user-visible changes.

Review Change Stack

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. type/cherry-pick-for-release-8.5 This PR is cherry-picked to release-8.5 from a source PR. labels May 9, 2026
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot mentioned this pull request May 9, 2026
12 tasks
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

ti-chi-bot Bot commented May 9, 2026

This cherry pick PR is for a release branch and has not yet been approved by triage owners.
Adding the do-not-merge/cherry-pick-not-approved label.

To merge this cherry pick:

  1. It must be LGTMed and approved by the reviewers firstly.
  2. For pull requests to TiDB-x branches, it must have no failed tests.
  3. AFTER it has lgtm and approved labels, please wait for the cherry-pick merging approval from triage owners.
Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coderabbitai Bot commented May 9, 2026

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The pull request downgrades a single log statement in the DeltaMerge read task scheduler from LOG_INFO to LOG_DEBUG. The log records pool submission metadata including pool ID, segment count, pending pools, and cost. No scheduling logic, control flow, or data structures are modified.

Changes

Log Level Downgrade

Layer / File(s) Summary
Log Level Adjustment
dbms/src/Storages/DeltaMerge/ReadThread/SegmentReadTaskScheduler.cpp
The "Submitted, pool_id=... segment_count=... pending_pools=... cost=...ns" log is downgraded from LOG_INFO to LOG_DEBUG in submitPendingPool.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Possibly related PRs

  • pingcap/tiflash#10815: Both PRs change the same log statement in SegmentReadTaskScheduler::submitPendingPool, downgrading the "Submitted … pending_pools … cost" message from INFO to DEBUG.

Suggested labels

lgtm, approved

Suggested reviewers

  • JinheLin
  • CalvinNeo

Poem

🐰 A log downgraded with a gentle hand,
From INFO's shout to DEBUG's whisper grand,
No logic bent, no flow askew,
Just quieter chatter—less noise to pursue! ✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 3

❌ Failed checks (1 warning, 2 inconclusive)

Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Docstring Coverage ⚠️ Warning Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.
Description check ❓ Inconclusive The PR description follows the required template structure but contains incomplete sections; the commit-message and problem-summary fields lack concrete details about what was changed. Add specific details in the 'Problem Summary' and 'What is changed' sections explaining which logs were downgraded and why.
Linked Issues check ❓ Inconclusive The linked issue #10816 lacks sufficient detail to assess whether the code changes meet stated requirements; only a title 'Downgrade some logs' is provided without objectives or acceptance criteria. Verify that the log downgrade in SegmentReadTaskScheduler matches the requirements specified in issue #10816.
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Title check ✅ Passed The title 'Storages: downgrade some logs (#10815)' accurately and clearly describes the main change of downgrading log levels in the storage subsystem.
Out of Scope Changes check ✅ Passed The single code change downgrades one log statement in SegmentReadTaskScheduler, which directly aligns with the stated objective of downgrading logs and introduces no unrelated modifications.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot Bot added needs-1-more-lgtm Indicates a PR needs 1 more LGTM. approved labels May 9, 2026
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@coderabbitai coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

Inline comments:
In `@dbms/src/Storages/DeltaMerge/ReadThread/SegmentReadTaskScheduler.cpp`:
- Line 71: The log call in SegmentReadTaskScheduler was downgraded to LOG_DEBUG;
restore it to LOG_INFO per storage-engine logging guidelines. Replace the
LOG_DEBUG(...) invocation in the SegmentReadTaskScheduler submission path with
LOG_INFO(log, ...) (using the existing LoggerPtr named log) so submission events
are logged at INFO level; ensure the surrounding context/message remains
unchanged and uses the same variables passed to the original call.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

  • Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
  • Create a new PR with the fixes

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Repository UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: e37ebdbd-3a48-4842-b3eb-1e7f9750fc32

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 3c07f78 and 7aa1df6.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • dbms/src/Storages/DeltaMerge/ReadThread/SegmentReadTaskScheduler.cpp

std::lock_guard lock(pending_mtx);
pending_pools.push_back(pool);
LOG_INFO(
LOG_DEBUG(
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 Minor | ⚡ Quick win

Restore LOG_INFO for storage scheduler submission logs

Line 71 downgrades a storage-engine scheduler event to LOG_DEBUG, which conflicts with the repository logging rule for this path. Please keep this as LOG_INFO (or document/adjust the guideline if this downgrade is intentional for release branches).

As per coding guidelines: "dbms/src/Storages/**/{DeltaMerge,KVStore,Page,S3}/**/*.{h,hpp,cpp}: Use LoggerPtr and LOG_INFO(log, ...) with relevant context."

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

In `@dbms/src/Storages/DeltaMerge/ReadThread/SegmentReadTaskScheduler.cpp` at line
71, The log call in SegmentReadTaskScheduler was downgraded to LOG_DEBUG;
restore it to LOG_INFO per storage-engine logging guidelines. Replace the
LOG_DEBUG(...) invocation in the SegmentReadTaskScheduler submission path with
LOG_INFO(log, ...) (using the existing LoggerPtr named log) so submission events
are logged at INFO level; ensure the surrounding context/message remains
unchanged and uses the same variables passed to the original call.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot Bot added lgtm and removed needs-1-more-lgtm Indicates a PR needs 1 more LGTM. labels May 9, 2026
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

ti-chi-bot Bot commented May 9, 2026

[LGTM Timeline notifier]

Timeline:

  • 2026-05-09 08:55:44.79083148 +0000 UTC m=+1782.016298181: ☑️ agreed by JinheLin.
  • 2026-05-09 09:09:31.855376451 +0000 UTC m=+2609.080843144: ☑️ agreed by CalvinNeo.

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

ti-chi-bot Bot commented May 11, 2026

@kolafish: adding LGTM is restricted to approvers and reviewers in OWNERS files.

Details

In response to this:

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

ti-chi-bot Bot commented May 11, 2026

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: CalvinNeo, JaySon-Huang, JinheLin, kolafish

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

The pull request process is described here

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
  • OWNERS [CalvinNeo,JaySon-Huang,JinheLin]

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

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

Labels

approved do-not-merge/cherry-pick-not-approved lgtm release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. type/cherry-pick-for-release-8.5 This PR is cherry-picked to release-8.5 from a source PR.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants