asterixdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ian Maxon <>
Subject Re: When is it appropirate to add reserved words to the AQL/SQL++ Grammar?
Date Wed, 12 Apr 2017 22:11:33 GMT
Yes, more or less. I'm not sure that I would force the buffer cache,
but at least I want all of the "object" representations outside of
that to have vanished such that their state must be regenerated from
the at-rest format.

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Mike Carey <> wrote:
> 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

View raw message