Skip to content
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

Make column resolution closer to MySQL #14426

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 2, 2023

Conversation

systay
Copy link
Collaborator

@systay systay commented Nov 2, 2023

Description

This PR updates our column resolution logic to make it closer to what MySQL does. We want to allow this type of query:

select u.foo, ue.foo as bar 
from user u, user_extra ue 
order by foo

MySQL correctly understands that foo here is pointing to u.foo and nothing else, but Vitess would not always make this connection. As part of this change, we also check for ambiguous columns and will fail some queries that MySQL also fails, but would be accepted by earlier releases of Vitess.

Backports of this PR should not fail ambiguous columns - we don't want to start failing queries in a patch release.

Related Issue(s)

Fixes #14067

Checklist

  • "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported
  • Tests were added or are not required
  • Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on the CI
  • Documentation was added or is not required

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <andres@planetscale.com>
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Nov 2, 2023

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

  • Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

  • Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
  • New features should be documented.
  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
  • There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

  • Is this flag really necessary?
  • Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

  • Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
  • If the workflow needs to be marked as required, the maintainer team must be notified.

Backward compatibility

  • Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
  • Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
  • RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
  • If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from vitess-operator and arewefastyet, if used there.
  • vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.

@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot added NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels Nov 2, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v19.0.0 milestone Nov 2, 2023
@systay systay removed NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request labels Nov 2, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@dbussink dbussink left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice little fix!

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <andres@planetscale.com>
@systay systay merged commit 806f777 into vitessio:main Nov 2, 2023
115 checks passed
@systay systay deleted the alias-handling branch November 2, 2023 12:03
systay added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 6, 2023
Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <andres@planetscale.com>
harshit-gangal pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 10, 2023
Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <andres@planetscale.com>
Co-authored-by: Andres Taylor <andres@planetscale.com>
systay added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 10, 2023
Co-authored-by: Andrés Taylor <andres@planetscale.com>
Co-authored-by: Harshit Gangal <harshit@planetscale.com>
deepthi pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 10, 2023
Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <andres@planetscale.com>
Signed-off-by: Harshit Gangal <harshit@planetscale.com>
Co-authored-by: Andres Taylor <andres@planetscale.com>
Co-authored-by: Harshit Gangal <harshit@planetscale.com>
@hmaurer hmaurer mentioned this pull request Mar 21, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Bug Report: weight_string() does not add the table identifier in a scattered join/orderby query
3 participants