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

Prepare schema tracking for all UDFs #15732

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Apr 18, 2024

Conversation

systay
Copy link
Collaborator

@systay systay commented Apr 17, 2024

Description

We recently added support for UDFs to the schema tracker. This PR tweaks the gRPC APIs used to make them easier to grow with. We know we want to track types from UDFs in a not-too-distant future, so we might as well prepare the tracker and the gRPC apis to allow for that. This way we don't have the issue with mismatched versions between the vtgate and the vttablet when upgrading.

Related Issue(s)

First attempt: #15705
Planner changes: #15710

Checklist

  • "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported to release branches
  • If this change is to be back-ported to previous releases, a justification is included in the PR description
  • Tests were added or are not required
  • Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on CI?
  • Documentation was added or is not required

Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Apr 17, 2024

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 NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required 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 Apr 17, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v20.0.0 milestone Apr 17, 2024
@systay systay added Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature) Component: Query Serving 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 NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required labels Apr 17, 2024
@systay systay force-pushed the udf-schema-tracker2 branch from 77f2c7f to a415863 Compare April 17, 2024 10:54
@systay systay marked this pull request as ready for review April 17, 2024 10:54
systay added 2 commits April 17, 2024 13:17
Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>
@systay systay force-pushed the udf-schema-tracker2 branch from 18d7594 to 965a647 Compare April 17, 2024 11:24
Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 17, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 40.90909% with 13 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 68.41%. Comparing base (178e6e8) to head (b22d484).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files Patch % Lines
go/vt/vttablet/tabletserver/query_executor.go 0.00% 11 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtgate/schema/tracker.go 80.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtgate/vtgate.go 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #15732      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   68.38%   68.41%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1556     1556              
  Lines      195361   195418      +57     
==========================================
+ Hits       133598   133695      +97     
+ Misses      61763    61723      -40     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Comment on lines 138 to 142
type UDF struct {
Name string
Aggregating bool
Type querypb.Type
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this looks unused.

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>
@systay systay merged commit 64d9037 into vitessio:main Apr 18, 2024
104 checks passed
@systay systay deleted the udf-schema-tracker2 branch April 18, 2024 05:41
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Component: Query Serving Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants