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: validate uniqueness of CHECK and of FOREIGN KEY constraints #17627

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

shlomi-noach
Copy link
Contributor

@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach commented Jan 26, 2025

Description

This PR adds schema-scope validations:

  • In the same schema, no two CHECK constraints have the same name.
  • In the same schema, no two FOREIGN KEY constraints have the same name.

Note: there is no problem for a CHECK constraint and for a FOREIGN KEY constraint to have the same name.

These validations are compliant with MySQL and are required, as MySQL strictly enforces this uniqueness.

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

Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <2607934+shlomi-noach@users.noreply.github.com>
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach added Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature) Component: schema management schemadiff and schema changes labels Jan 26, 2025
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach requested a review from dbussink January 26, 2025 08:53
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Jan 26, 2025

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 Jan 26, 2025
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach changed the title schemadiff: validate uniqueness of CHECK and of FOREIGN KEY constraints schemadiff: validate uniqueness of CHECK and of FOREIGN KEY constraints Jan 26, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v22.0.0 milestone Jan 26, 2025
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach requested a review from a team January 26, 2025 08:53
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach removed NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels Jan 26, 2025
Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <2607934+shlomi-noach@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <2607934+shlomi-noach@users.noreply.github.com>
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 26, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 67.62%. Comparing base (a6c2896) to head (4d5fbd8).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #17627      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.64%   67.62%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1586     1586              
  Lines      255629   255647      +18     
==========================================
- Hits       172910   172882      -28     
- Misses      82719    82765      +46     

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

Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <2607934+shlomi-noach@users.noreply.github.com>
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach requested a review from a team January 27, 2025 07:57
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