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

feat: add support for WITH ROLLUP #15930

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
May 14, 2024
Merged

Conversation

systay
Copy link
Collaborator

@systay systay commented May 13, 2024

Description

Adds parser support for GROUP BY... WITH ROLLUP. Before this, Vitess did not support WITH ROLLUP.

This PR only adds parser support - queries using WITH ROLLUP on unsharded keyspaces will be able to use these queries. If the query needs to be split across multiple shards, vtgate will fail with an unsupported error.

Related Issue(s)

Fixes #7476

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

@systay systay added Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature) Component: Query Serving labels May 13, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented May 13, 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 May 13, 2024
@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 NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required labels May 13, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v20.0.0 milestone May 13, 2024
Copy link
Member

@frouioui frouioui left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just one nit, the rest looks good to me but let's see what @GuptaManan100 says about the shit/reduce introduced. Approving this for now 🚀

@@ -42,11 +42,11 @@ func isMergeable(ctx *plancontext.PlanningContext, query sqlparser.SelectStateme

switch node := query.(type) {
case *sqlparser.Select:
if len(node.GroupBy) > 0 {
if node.GroupBy != nil && len(node.GroupBy.Exprs) > 0 {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since we are setting group by to nil everytime we empty it, it should be fine to just check for node.GroupBy != nil.

Copy link
Member

@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I looked at the sql.y changes, and although it is possible to get rid of the shift-reduce conflict, it is going to make the code a little less readable. I think its okay to leave the conflict since they resolve to shifting.

@@ -375,7 +376,7 @@ func markBindVariable(yylex yyLexer, bvar string) {
%token <str> ST_Area ST_Centroid ST_ExteriorRing ST_InteriorRingN ST_NumInteriorRings ST_NumGeometries ST_GeometryN ST_LongFromGeoHash ST_PointFromGeoHash ST_LatFromGeoHash ST_GeoHash ST_AsGeoJSON ST_GeomFromGeoJSON

// Match
%token <str> MATCH AGAINST BOOLEAN LANGUAGE WITH QUERY EXPANSION WITHOUT VALIDATION
%token <str> MATCH AGAINST BOOLEAN LANGUAGE WITH QUERY EXPANSION WITHOUT VALIDATION ROLLUP
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ROLLUP needs to be added to the list of non-reserved keywords list in the end of the file.

Copy link

codecov bot commented May 14, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 75.60976% with 20 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 68.45%. Comparing base (0353ad4) to head (85c1df9).
Report is 5 commits behind head on main.

Files Patch % Lines
go/vt/vtgate/planbuilder/operators/aggregator.go 0.00% 10 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtgate/simplifier/simplifier.go 50.00% 9 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtgate/semantics/scoper.go 83.33% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #15930      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   68.45%   68.45%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1559     1559              
  Lines      196825   196872      +47     
==========================================
+ Hits       134736   134764      +28     
- Misses      62089    62108      +19     

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

@systay systay merged commit 473c49a into vitessio:main May 14, 2024
93 checks passed
@systay systay deleted the with_rollup branch May 14, 2024 09:58
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.

Add support for GROUP BY WITH ROLLUP in the Vitess query parser
5 participants