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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

UNION column type coercion #14245

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Oct 12, 2023
Merged

UNION column type coercion #14245

merged 12 commits into from
Oct 12, 2023

Conversation

systay
Copy link
Collaborator

@systay systay commented Oct 11, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Description

When the different sub-SELECTs of an UNION return different types, we need to coerce them all to a common type.
This PR adds checks when we have to perform the UNION-concatenation on the vtgate to coerce the values into a common type when this is needed.

Future work should make this something we plan instead of check at runtime.

Related Issue(s)

Fixes #14266

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

Deployment Notes

@vitess-bot
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Oct 11, 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 Oct 11, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v19.0.0 milestone Oct 11, 2023
systay and others added 2 commits October 11, 2023 08:38
@systay
license
6c15016 
Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>
@harshit-gangal
coerce the fields and row values on concatenation
1365b7d 
Signed-off-by: Harshit Gangal <[email protected]>
@systay systay added Type: Bug Component: Query Serving Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature) and 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 Type: Bug labels Oct 11, 2023
@systay systay marked this pull request as ready for review October 12, 2023 07:29
frouioui
frouioui reviewed Oct 12, 2023
View reviewed changes
go/test/endtoend/vtgate/queries/union/union_test.go
@@ -126,4 +127,7 @@ func TestUnion(t *testing.T) {
mcmp.AssertMatches(`(SELECT 1,'a') UNION ALL (SELECT 1,'a') UNION ALL (SELECT 1,'a') ORDER BY 1`, `[[INT64(1) VARCHAR("a")] [INT64(1) VARCHAR("a")] [INT64(1) VARCHAR("a")]]`)
mcmp.AssertMatches(`(SELECT 1,'a') ORDER BY 1`, `[[INT64(1) VARCHAR("a")]]`)
mcmp.AssertMatches(`(SELECT 1,'a' order by 1) union (SELECT 1,'a' ORDER BY 1)`, `[[INT64(1) VARCHAR("a")]]`)
if utils.BinaryIsAtVersion(19, "vtgate") {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just realised this is a terrible name BinaryIsAtVersion 😅

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Will be addressed by #14269

@frouioui frouioui merged commit 4478339 into vitessio:main Oct 12, 2023
115 checks passed
@frouioui frouioui deleted the union-types branch October 12, 2023 20:07
@frouioui frouioui mentioned this pull request Oct 12, 2023
Merged
@dbussink dbussink mentioned this pull request Oct 21, 2023
Merged
4 tasks
@systay systay mentioned this pull request Mar 13, 2024
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@frouioui frouioui frouioui approved these changes

@harshit-gangal harshit-gangal harshit-gangal approved these changes

@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 Awaiting requested review from GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 is a code owner

@arthurschreiber arthurschreiber Awaiting requested review from arthurschreiber arthurschreiber is a code owner

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Component: Query Serving Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature)
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v19.0.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Feature Request: UNION coercion support
3 participants
@systay @harshit-gangal @frouioui