Skip to content

Fix auto random user scenario #20733

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

Closed

Conversation

alastori
Copy link
Contributor

What is changed, added or deleted? (Required)

This PR updates the "Clear the auto-increment ID cache" section in auto-random.md to address confusion reported in issue #20732. Specifically, the changes:

  • Clarify that ALTER TABLE ... AUTO_RANDOM_BASE without the FORCE keyword does not actually change the value, despite the warning message.
  • Emphasize that the FORCE keyword is mandatory to modify AUTO_RANDOM_BASE.
  • Explicitly state that attempting to set AUTO_RANDOM_BASE to 0, even with FORCE, will result in an error.
  • Clarify that a non-zero positive integer must be used with FORCE.
  • Improve the explanation of how explicit inserts can potentially collide with the internal auto-incrementing part of AUTO_RANDOM IDs, potentially leading to duplicate key errors.
  • Split a longer paragraph into smaller ones for better readability.

Which TiDB version(s) do your changes apply to? (Required)

Tips for choosing the affected version(s):

By default, CHOOSE MASTER ONLY so your changes will be applied to the next TiDB major or minor releases. If your PR involves a product feature behavior change or a compatibility change, CHOOSE THE AFFECTED RELEASE BRANCH(ES) AND MASTER.

For details, see tips for choosing the affected versions.

  • master (the latest development version)
  • v9.0 (TiDB 9.0 versions)
  • v8.5 (TiDB 8.5 versions)
  • v8.4 (TiDB 8.4 versions)
  • v8.3 (TiDB 8.3 versions)
  • v8.1 (TiDB 8.1 versions)
  • v7.5 (TiDB 7.5 versions)
  • v7.1 (TiDB 7.1 versions)
  • v6.5 (TiDB 6.5 versions)
  • v6.1 (TiDB 6.1 versions)
  • v5.4 (TiDB 5.4 versions)

What is the related PR or file link(s)?

Do your changes match any of the following descriptions?

  • Delete files
  • Change aliases
  • Need modification after applied to another branch
  • Might cause conflicts after applie

Add repository check condition to bot.yaml to ensure PR reminder workflow only runs on the original pingcap/docs repository.
This prevents workflow failures on forks due to missing webhook secrets.
Add repository check condition to link.yaml to ensure PR reminder workflow only runs on the original pingcap/docs repository.
This prevents workflow failures on forks due to missing webhook secrets.
Copy link

Warning

You have reached your daily quota limit. As a reminder, free tier users are limited to 5 requests per day. Please wait up to 24 hours and I will start processing your requests again!

Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Apr 10, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign lance6716 for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

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

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added missing-translation-status This PR does not have translation status info. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Apr 10, 2025
@alastori
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Frank945946

@alastori
Copy link
Contributor Author

Added other commits by mistake. I will close/cancel this PR and submit another.

@alastori alastori closed this Apr 10, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
missing-translation-status This PR does not have translation status info. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

need to clarify the example in AUTO_RANDOM
1 participant