Fix INSERT into Distributed() table with MATERIALIZED column by azat · Pull Request #5429 · ClickHouse/ClickHouse

azat · 2019-05-27T17:44:04Z

By just skipping MATERIALIZED columns during processing.

P.S. you cannot use insert_allow_materialized_columns since it works
only for Buffer() engine.

Fixes: #4015
Fixes: #3673
Fixes: 01501fa ("correct column list for rewritten INSERT query into Distributed [#CLICKHOUSE-4161]")

Category (leave one):

Bug Fix

By just skipping MATERIALIZED columns during processing. P.S. you cannot use insert_allow_materialized_columns since it works only for Buffer() engine. Fixes: ClickHouse#4015 Fixes: ClickHouse#3673 Fixes: 01501fa ("correct column list for rewritten INSERT query into Distributed [#CLICKHOUSE-4161]")

azat · 2019-05-30T18:55:40Z

Any thoughts on this?

vitlibar · 2019-05-31T18:43:52Z

Any thoughts on this?

Looks good.
I've simplified your solution slightly and I'll merge it after passing automatic checks.

vitlibar · 2019-06-01T09:28:15Z

I guess that this will resolve table overlapping, just ignore my question

Yes, we want to run as many tests as possible in parallel.

Previous patch e527def ("Fix INSERT into Distributed() table with MATERIALIZED column") fixes it only for cases when the node is local, i.e. direct insert. This patch address the problem when the node is not local (`is_local == false`), by erasing materialized columns on INSERT into Distributed. And this patch fixes two cases, depends on `insert_distributed_sync` setting: - `insert_distributed_sync=0` ``` Not found column value in block. There are only columns: date. Stack trace: 2. 0x7ffff7be92e0 DB::Exception::Exception() dbms/src/Common/Exception.h:27 3. 0x7fffec5d6cf6 DB::Block::getByName(...) dbms/src/Core/Block.cpp:187 4. 0x7fffec2fe067 DB::NativeBlockInputStream::readImpl() dbms/src/DataStreams/NativeBlockInputStream.cpp:159 5. 0x7fffec2d223f DB::IBlockInputStream::read() dbms/src/DataStreams/IBlockInputStream.cpp:61 6. 0x7ffff7c6d40d DB::TCPHandler::receiveData() dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:971 7. 0x7ffff7c6cc1d DB::TCPHandler::receivePacket() dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:855 8. 0x7ffff7c6a1ef DB::TCPHandler::readDataNext(unsigned long const&, int const&) dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:406 9. 0x7ffff7c6a41b DB::TCPHandler::readData(DB::Settings const&) dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:437 10. 0x7ffff7c6a5d9 DB::TCPHandler::processInsertQuery(DB::Settings const&) dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:464 11. 0x7ffff7c687b5 DB::TCPHandler::runImpl() dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:257 ``` - `insert_distributed_sync=1` ``` 2019.10.18 13:23:22.114578 [ 44 ] {a78f669f-0b08-4337-abf8-d31e958f6d12} <Error> executeQuery: Code: 171, e.displayText() = DB::Exception: Block structure mismatch in RemoteBlockOutputStream stream: different number of columns: date Date UInt16(size = 1), value Date UInt16(size = 1) date Date UInt16(size = 0): Insertion status: Wrote 1 blocks and 0 rows on shard 0 replica 0, 127.0.0.1:59000 (average 0 ms per block) Wrote 0 blocks and 0 rows on shard 1 replica 0, 127.0.0.2:59000 (average 2 ms per block) (version 19.16.1.1) (from [::1]:3624) (in query: INSERT INTO distributed_00952 VALUES ), Stack trace: 2. 0x7ffff7be92e0 DB::Exception::Exception() dbms/src/Common/Exception.h:27 3. 0x7fffec5da4e9 DB::checkBlockStructure<void>(...)::{...}::operator()(...) const dbms/src/Core/Block.cpp:460 4. 0x7fffec5da671 void DB::checkBlockStructure<void>(...) dbms/src/Core/Block.cpp:467 5. 0x7fffec5d8d58 DB::assertBlocksHaveEqualStructure(...) dbms/src/Core/Block.cpp:515 6. 0x7fffec326630 DB::RemoteBlockOutputStream::write(DB::Block const&) dbms/src/DataStreams/RemoteBlockOutputStream.cpp:68 7. 0x7fffe98bd154 DB::DistributedBlockOutputStream::runWritingJob(DB::DistributedBlockOutputStream::JobReplica&, DB::Block const&)::{lambda()ClickHouse#1}::operator()() const dbms/src/Storages/Distributed/DistributedBlockOutputStream.cpp:280 <snip> ```` Fixes: ClickHouse#7365 Fixes: ClickHouse#5429 Refs: ClickHouse#6891

* Fix INSERT into Distributed non local node with MATERIALIZED columns Previous patch e527def ("Fix INSERT into Distributed() table with MATERIALIZED column") fixes it only for cases when the node is local, i.e. direct insert. This patch address the problem when the node is not local (`is_local == false`), by erasing materialized columns on INSERT into Distributed. And this patch fixes two cases, depends on `insert_distributed_sync` setting: - `insert_distributed_sync=0` ``` Not found column value in block. There are only columns: date. Stack trace: 2. 0x7ffff7be92e0 DB::Exception::Exception() dbms/src/Common/Exception.h:27 3. 0x7fffec5d6cf6 DB::Block::getByName(...) dbms/src/Core/Block.cpp:187 4. 0x7fffec2fe067 DB::NativeBlockInputStream::readImpl() dbms/src/DataStreams/NativeBlockInputStream.cpp:159 5. 0x7fffec2d223f DB::IBlockInputStream::read() dbms/src/DataStreams/IBlockInputStream.cpp:61 6. 0x7ffff7c6d40d DB::TCPHandler::receiveData() dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:971 7. 0x7ffff7c6cc1d DB::TCPHandler::receivePacket() dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:855 8. 0x7ffff7c6a1ef DB::TCPHandler::readDataNext(unsigned long const&, int const&) dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:406 9. 0x7ffff7c6a41b DB::TCPHandler::readData(DB::Settings const&) dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:437 10. 0x7ffff7c6a5d9 DB::TCPHandler::processInsertQuery(DB::Settings const&) dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:464 11. 0x7ffff7c687b5 DB::TCPHandler::runImpl() dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:257 ``` - `insert_distributed_sync=1` ``` 2019.10.18 13:23:22.114578 [ 44 ] {a78f669f-0b08-4337-abf8-d31e958f6d12} <Error> executeQuery: Code: 171, e.displayText() = DB::Exception: Block structure mismatch in RemoteBlockOutputStream stream: different number of columns: date Date UInt16(size = 1), value Date UInt16(size = 1) date Date UInt16(size = 0): Insertion status: Wrote 1 blocks and 0 rows on shard 0 replica 0, 127.0.0.1:59000 (average 0 ms per block) Wrote 0 blocks and 0 rows on shard 1 replica 0, 127.0.0.2:59000 (average 2 ms per block) (version 19.16.1.1) (from [::1]:3624) (in query: INSERT INTO distributed_00952 VALUES ), Stack trace: 2. 0x7ffff7be92e0 DB::Exception::Exception() dbms/src/Common/Exception.h:27 3. 0x7fffec5da4e9 DB::checkBlockStructure<void>(...)::{...}::operator()(...) const dbms/src/Core/Block.cpp:460 4. 0x7fffec5da671 void DB::checkBlockStructure<void>(...) dbms/src/Core/Block.cpp:467 5. 0x7fffec5d8d58 DB::assertBlocksHaveEqualStructure(...) dbms/src/Core/Block.cpp:515 6. 0x7fffec326630 DB::RemoteBlockOutputStream::write(DB::Block const&) dbms/src/DataStreams/RemoteBlockOutputStream.cpp:68 7. 0x7fffe98bd154 DB::DistributedBlockOutputStream::runWritingJob(DB::DistributedBlockOutputStream::JobReplica&, DB::Block const&)::{lambda()#1}::operator()() const dbms/src/Storages/Distributed/DistributedBlockOutputStream.cpp:280 <snip> ```` Fixes: #7365 Fixes: #5429 Refs: #6891 * Cover INSERT into Distributed with MATERIALIZED columns and !is_local node I guess that adding new cluster into server-test.xml is not required, but it won't harm. * Update DistributedBlockOutputStream.cpp

* Fix INSERT into Distributed non local node with MATERIALIZED columns Previous patch e527def ("Fix INSERT into Distributed() table with MATERIALIZED column") fixes it only for cases when the node is local, i.e. direct insert. This patch address the problem when the node is not local (`is_local == false`), by erasing materialized columns on INSERT into Distributed. And this patch fixes two cases, depends on `insert_distributed_sync` setting: - `insert_distributed_sync=0` ``` Not found column value in block. There are only columns: date. Stack trace: 2. 0x7ffff7be92e0 DB::Exception::Exception() dbms/src/Common/Exception.h:27 3. 0x7fffec5d6cf6 DB::Block::getByName(...) dbms/src/Core/Block.cpp:187 4. 0x7fffec2fe067 DB::NativeBlockInputStream::readImpl() dbms/src/DataStreams/NativeBlockInputStream.cpp:159 5. 0x7fffec2d223f DB::IBlockInputStream::read() dbms/src/DataStreams/IBlockInputStream.cpp:61 6. 0x7ffff7c6d40d DB::TCPHandler::receiveData() dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:971 7. 0x7ffff7c6cc1d DB::TCPHandler::receivePacket() dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:855 8. 0x7ffff7c6a1ef DB::TCPHandler::readDataNext(unsigned long const&, int const&) dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:406 9. 0x7ffff7c6a41b DB::TCPHandler::readData(DB::Settings const&) dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:437 10. 0x7ffff7c6a5d9 DB::TCPHandler::processInsertQuery(DB::Settings const&) dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:464 11. 0x7ffff7c687b5 DB::TCPHandler::runImpl() dbms/programs/server/TCPHandler.cpp:257 ``` - `insert_distributed_sync=1` ``` 2019.10.18 13:23:22.114578 [ 44 ] {a78f669f-0b08-4337-abf8-d31e958f6d12} <Error> executeQuery: Code: 171, e.displayText() = DB::Exception: Block structure mismatch in RemoteBlockOutputStream stream: different number of columns: date Date UInt16(size = 1), value Date UInt16(size = 1) date Date UInt16(size = 0): Insertion status: Wrote 1 blocks and 0 rows on shard 0 replica 0, 127.0.0.1:59000 (average 0 ms per block) Wrote 0 blocks and 0 rows on shard 1 replica 0, 127.0.0.2:59000 (average 2 ms per block) (version 19.16.1.1) (from [::1]:3624) (in query: INSERT INTO distributed_00952 VALUES ), Stack trace: 2. 0x7ffff7be92e0 DB::Exception::Exception() dbms/src/Common/Exception.h:27 3. 0x7fffec5da4e9 DB::checkBlockStructure<void>(...)::{...}::operator()(...) const dbms/src/Core/Block.cpp:460 4. 0x7fffec5da671 void DB::checkBlockStructure<void>(...) dbms/src/Core/Block.cpp:467 5. 0x7fffec5d8d58 DB::assertBlocksHaveEqualStructure(...) dbms/src/Core/Block.cpp:515 6. 0x7fffec326630 DB::RemoteBlockOutputStream::write(DB::Block const&) dbms/src/DataStreams/RemoteBlockOutputStream.cpp:68 7. 0x7fffe98bd154 DB::DistributedBlockOutputStream::runWritingJob(DB::DistributedBlockOutputStream::JobReplica&, DB::Block const&)::{lambda()#1}::operator()() const dbms/src/Storages/Distributed/DistributedBlockOutputStream.cpp:280 <snip> ```` Fixes: #7365 Fixes: #5429 Refs: #6891 * Cover INSERT into Distributed with MATERIALIZED columns and !is_local node I guess that adding new cluster into server-test.xml is not required, but it won't harm. * Update DistributedBlockOutputStream.cpp (cherry picked from commit 29052b6)

alexey-milovidov · 2021-04-16T22:42:15Z

@azat How comes it does not work in version 20.3?
#16897

azat · 2021-04-17T04:39:14Z

@alexey-milovidov list of non-materialized columns is obtained from the Distributed table, while in #16897 the Distributed table has all columns non-materialized that's why it wasn't filtered out and rejected.

akuzm added the can be tested label May 27, 2019

azat force-pushed the INSERT-into-Distributed-with-MATERIALIZED branch from 8f0c0d2 to a06d492 Compare May 27, 2019 20:31

azat force-pushed the INSERT-into-Distributed-with-MATERIALIZED branch from a06d492 to e527def Compare May 27, 2019 20:32

vitlibar self-assigned this May 31, 2019

vitlibar added 2 commits May 31, 2019 21:31

Use function getSampleBlockNonMaterialized() to simplify the solution

421c6a9

Unique names of tables in the test

f679d33

vitlibar merged commit a4ce427 into ClickHouse:master Jun 1, 2019

vitlibar added the pr-bugfix Pull request with bugfix, not backported by default label Jun 1, 2019

azat deleted the INSERT-into-Distributed-with-MATERIALIZED branch June 2, 2019 16:18

alesapin added v19.7 labels Jun 7, 2019

filimonov mentioned this pull request Oct 17, 2019

19.15.3.6 distributed+ReplicatedMergeTree table can not write to materialized columns #7365

Closed

azat mentioned this pull request Oct 18, 2019

Fix INSERT into Distributed non local node with MATERIALIZED columns #7377

Merged

azat mentioned this pull request Apr 20, 2021

Respect insert_allow_materialized_columns for INSERT into Distributed() #23349

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Fix INSERT into Distributed() table with MATERIALIZED column#5429

Fix INSERT into Distributed() table with MATERIALIZED column#5429
vitlibar merged 3 commits intoClickHouse:masterfrom
azat:INSERT-into-Distributed-with-MATERIALIZED

azat commented May 27, 2019 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

azat commented May 30, 2019

Uh oh!

vitlibar commented May 31, 2019 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

vitlibar commented Jun 1, 2019 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

alexey-milovidov commented Apr 16, 2021

Uh oh!

azat commented Apr 17, 2021

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

Conversation

azat commented May 27, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

azat commented May 30, 2019

Uh oh!

vitlibar commented May 31, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

vitlibar commented Jun 1, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

alexey-milovidov commented Apr 16, 2021

Uh oh!

azat commented Apr 17, 2021

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

azat commented May 27, 2019 •

edited

Loading

vitlibar commented May 31, 2019 •

edited

Loading

vitlibar commented Jun 1, 2019 •

edited

Loading