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

evalengine: Add handling for current timestamp functions #12742

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Mar 29, 2023

Conversation

dbussink
Copy link
Contributor

@dbussink dbussink commented Mar 28, 2023

Description

This adds support for time related functions for the current date and / or time like NOW().

It also adds support for dealing with USER(), DATABASE() and VERSION().

Related Issue(s)

Part of #9647. Also helps improve the situation for issues like #12674

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

@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot added NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels Mar 28, 2023
@vitess-bot
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Mar 28, 2023

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • If this is a change that users need to know about, please apply the release notes (needs details) label so that merging is blocked unless the summary release notes document is included.
  • If a test is added or modified, there should be a documentation on top of the test to explain what the expected behavior is what the test does.

If a new flag is being introduced:

  • Is it really necessary to add this flag?
  • Flag names should be clear and intuitive (as far as possible)
  • Help text should be descriptive.
  • Flag names should use dashes (-) as word separators rather than underscores (_).

If a workflow is added or modified:

  • Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
  • If the workflow should be required, the maintainer team should be notified.

Bug fixes

  • There should be at least one unit or end-to-end test.
  • The Pull Request description should include a link to an issue that describes the bug.

Non-trivial changes

  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.

New/Existing features

  • Should be documented, either by modifying the existing documentation or creating new documentation.
  • New features should have a link to a feature request issue or an RFC that documents the use cases, corner cases and test cases.

Backward compatibility

  • Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
  • Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
  • vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.
  • RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
  • If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from VTop, if used there.

@dbussink dbussink added Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature) Component: Evalengine changes to the evaluation engine and removed NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels Mar 28, 2023
@dbussink dbussink force-pushed the dbussink/add-now-evalengine branch from 1b5fb0f to 0e29b63 Compare March 28, 2023 08:48
@dbussink dbussink force-pushed the dbussink/add-now-evalengine branch from 0e29b63 to d49f60d Compare March 28, 2023 08:56
@vmg vmg requested review from ajm188 and deepthi as code owners March 28, 2023 10:31
@vmg vmg force-pushed the dbussink/add-now-evalengine branch from 45b0d20 to 86a1731 Compare March 28, 2023 13:34
dbussink and others added 9 commits March 28, 2023 17:59
Signed-off-by: Dirkjan Bussink <[email protected]>
This adds support for handling `USER()`, `DATABASE()` and `VERSION()`.
The last two have fairly well defined semantics, but the first is really
a best effort.

`USER()` returns the effective caller id if it's set, and otherwise
falls back to the default `vt_app@localhost` that Vitess uses. Today the
value that is returned isn't very useful on Vitess anyway since it
returns the MySQL level user. So the called id is in practice more
useful already if available.

Signed-off-by: Dirkjan Bussink <[email protected]>
@dbussink dbussink force-pushed the dbussink/add-now-evalengine branch from ddf2f5b to 83c26e4 Compare March 28, 2023 16:00
vmg and others added 3 commits March 28, 2023 18:21
Comment on lines +180 to +199
func (spec_U) format(ctx *formatctx, b []byte) []byte {
panic("TODO")
}

func (spec_u) format(ctx *formatctx, b []byte) []byte {
panic("TODO")
}

func (spec_V) format(ctx *formatctx, b []byte) []byte {
panic("TODO")
}

func (spec_v) format(ctx *formatctx, b []byte) []byte {
_, week := ctx.t.ISOWeek()
return appendInt(b, week, 2)
}

func (spec_X) format(ctx *formatctx, b []byte) []byte {
panic("TODO")
}
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Note that these parsing specs are left as TODO because they're not being used by any of the parser code. They'll be eventually implemented when we get to DATE_FORMAT

Comment on lines +1 to +2
/*
Copyright 2023 The Vitess Authors.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nice

@vmg vmg merged commit 61e66fe into vitessio:main Mar 29, 2023
@vmg vmg deleted the dbussink/add-now-evalengine branch March 29, 2023 10:19
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Component: Evalengine changes to the evaluation engine 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