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

Enhanced output for vexplain keys #16892

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Oct 7, 2024
Merged

Conversation

systay
Copy link
Collaborator

@systay systay commented Oct 4, 2024

Description

This PR enhances the output of vexplain keys to provide more detailed information about column usage in SQL queries, while maintaining backwards compatibility. The additional information will aid in more accurate index suggestions and query optimization.

Changes

  • Added operator information to join and filter columns
  • Included select columns in the output

New Output Format

For a query such as:

SELECT u.foo, ue.bar, count(*) 
from user u, user_extra ue 
where user.name = 'Tony' and u.id = ue.user_id
group by u.foo, ue.bar

The output will be:

{
	"statementType": "SELECT",
	"groupingColumns": [
		"user.foo",
		"user_extra.bar"
	],
	"joinColumns": [
		"user.id =",
		"user_extra.user_id ="
	],
	"filterColumns": [
		"user.name ="
	],
	"selectColumns": [
		"user.foo",
		"user_extra.bar"
	]
}

Motivation

The additional information provided by this enhancement will allow for more precise index suggestions and query optimization tools. By including operator information and select columns, users can make more informed decisions about index creation and query structure.

Related Issue(s)

#16830

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

Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Oct 4, 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 Oct 4, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v21.0.0 milestone Oct 4, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 4, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 66.66667% with 60 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 69.44%. Comparing base (eab262e) to head (5bccc70).
Report is 14 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
go/vt/sqlparser/ast_funcs.go 43.01% 53 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtgate/planbuilder/operators/keys.go 91.95% 7 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #16892      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   69.42%   69.44%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1571     1570       -1     
  Lines      203276   203606     +330     
==========================================
+ Hits       141125   141393     +268     
- Misses      62151    62213      +62     

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

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>
@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 Oct 4, 2024
@systay systay marked this pull request as ready for review October 4, 2024 13:33
@systay systay changed the title add more information to vexplain keys Enhanced output for vexplain keys Oct 4, 2024
systay added 3 commits October 4, 2024 15:45
Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>
@systay systay merged commit 30d63d4 into vitessio:main Oct 7, 2024
98 checks passed
@systay systay deleted the more-vexplain-keys branch October 7, 2024 06:46
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