-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 992
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Chunk size patch #3624
Chunk size patch #3624
Conversation
Are we sure that that issue is caused by the Since this does fail in practice, there's some mistake in that calculation, and I'd really like to know what that is. Is there any chance you can run a failing subgraph locally and have |
@lutter added logs in https://github.com/Ryabina-io/graph-node/blob/chunk_size_debug/store/postgres/src/relational.rs#L807
|
It seems that But graph-node/store/postgres/src/relational_queries.rs Lines 596 to 616 in 28580bb
A single iteration would produce 2 bindings. I don't know if @Ryabina-io's subgraph even uses that field type, but it might be worth giving a shot at including those bindings in the chunk size estimate. |
Nice find. Yes, that would definitely do it since it will use 2 bindings for each term in the |
This pull request hasn't had any activity for the last 90 days. If there's no more activity over the course of the next 14 days, it will automatically be closed. |
Closes #2330.
I added +2 to chunk size calculation denominator, as @tilacog advises and our subgraph continued indexing.
I don't know internals of
table.columns.len()
- does it counts full-text search columns for example. But with this PR I want to push progress on this issue somehow.Also I created this PR to 0.26.0 release branch because I tested only that change over 0.26.0 version and I don't know right process.