asterixdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Carey <>
Subject Re: When is it appropirate to add reserved words to the AQL/SQL++ Grammar?
Date Wed, 12 Apr 2017 21:41:21 GMT
So you want to basically quiesce a dataset "all the way" - so that it's 
not open at all, and perhaps so that the buffer pool also has none of 
its pages resident?

On 4/12/17 2:26 PM, Ian Maxon wrote:
> That's a little different than from what I'd like to do. Basically I
> want to evict the dataset entirely. My alterior motive here is to test
> the correctness of persisted storage artifacts as right now in many
> cases this is not covered. It has been a recurring theme in many bugs
> that there is some stored artifact on disk that is written incorrectly
> but never read during tests, because often the tests simply never
> encounter the path in which this would occur (restart,eviction, etc.)
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Ildar Absalyamov
> <> wrote:
>> Ian,
>> There is an existing API, which does exactly that.
>> I have been successfully using it in my experiments.
>>> On Apr 12, 2017, at 13:41, Ian Maxon <> wrote:
>>> Hey all,
>>> I was working on a patch that would add a 'flush dataset' DDL command
>>> (mainly for testing), and of course this would require adding 'flush'
>>> as a new reserved word. What is the consensus on when this would be
>>> permitted at this point? There are other ways to do this, of course, I
>>> could expose this functionality through a separate API, and I am not
>>> really partial to one solution or the other.
>>> Thanks,
>>> - Ian
>> Best regards,
>> Ildar

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message