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

schemadiff: reject non-deterministic function in new column's default value #16684

Conversation

shlomi-noach
Copy link
Contributor

@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach commented Aug 29, 2024

Description

This PR introduces a new diff hint: NonDeterministicDefaultStrategy, which can take these values:

When it's set to NonDeterministicDefaultReject,

schemadiff now errors on table diffs where:

  • A new column is added
  • The column has an expression (non-literal) default value
  • The expression contains a non-detereministic function, specifically one of:
    • SYSDATE()
    • UUID()
    • RAND()

This matches MySQL behavior as in:

alter table t add column v varchar(36) NOT NULL DEFAULT (uuid());
ERROR 1674 (HY000): Statement is unsafe because it uses a system function that may return a different value on the slave.

There is no need to handle MODIFY COLUMN or CHANGE COLUMN statements, because those cannot introduce un-computed column data, and only operate on existing columns.

Related Issue(s)

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

Deployment Notes

…ministic function in column's default value

Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach requested review from dbussink and a team August 29, 2024 13:21
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach requested a review from mattlord as a code owner August 29, 2024 13:21
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Aug 29, 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 Aug 29, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v21.0.0 milestone Aug 29, 2024
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach added Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature) Component: schema management schemadiff and schema changes 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 Aug 29, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 29, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 68.94%. Comparing base (e89f684) to head (2cd96bc).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##             main   #16684    +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage   68.93%   68.94%            
========================================
  Files        1564     1565     +1     
  Lines      201371   201553   +182     
========================================
+ Hits       138821   138959   +138     
- Misses      62550    62594    +44     

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

}

func (e *NonDeterministicDefaultError) Error() string {
return fmt.Sprintf("column %s.%s default value uses non-deterministic function: %v", sqlescape.EscapeID(e.Table), sqlescape.EscapeID(e.Column), e.Function)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Super nitty, but e.Function is a string so we can use %s instead of %v.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fixed.

foundFunction = node.Name.String()
return false, nil
default:
// recurse into function argument expressions
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this recursion needed? Walk already visits everything doesn't it?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Confirmed, the recursion is not needed. An earlier iteration led me to believe it was. The existing unit tests already cover two inner function scenarios so this is testes.

Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
from: "create table t1 (id int primary key, a int)",
to: "create table t2 (id int primary key, a int, v varchar(36) not null default (uuid()))",
diff: "alter table t1 add column v varchar(36) not null default (uuid())",
cdiff: "ALTER TABLE `t1` ADD COLUMN `v` varchar(36) NOT NULL DEFAULT (uuid())",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If this always errors on MySQL, should it even be a flag on schemadiff or should we also always use error?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Agreed. Removed the option altogether, the issue title is now misleading and I'll fix it. Confirmed that MySQL rejects this kind of statement even for empty tables (as opposed to another issue we found the other day where the success depends on whether the table is empty or not). This is a bit of inconsistent behavior for MySQL, but at least we're consistent with it...

…'s behavior reliably rejects adding columns with nondeterministic functions, even in the case of empty tables

Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach changed the title schemadiff: new NonDeterministicDefaultStrategy, can reject non-deterministic function in column's default value schemadiff: reject non-deterministic function in new column's default value Sep 2, 2024
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach merged commit 37e0707 into vitessio:main Sep 2, 2024
129 checks passed
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach deleted the schemadiff-reject-non-deterministic-expressions branch September 2, 2024 06:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Component: schema management schemadiff and schema changes Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants