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

Handle Percona compressed column extension #17660

Merged

Conversation

dbussink
Copy link
Contributor

@dbussink dbussink commented Jan 30, 2025

Percona has a custom extension where you can set compression at a column level, see:

https://docs.percona.com/percona-server/5.7/flexibility/compressed_columns.html

This is an extension of the parser as well. As we also support Percona, we should be able to parse this too and not fail with a syntax error.

Related Issue(s)

Reported here.

Part of fixing #17670

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

Percona has a custom extension where you can set compression at a column
level, see:

https://docs.percona.com/percona-server/5.7/flexibility/compressed_columns.html

This is an extension of the parser as well. As we also support Percona,
we should be able to parse this too and not fail with a syntax error.

Signed-off-by: Dirkjan Bussink <[email protected]>
@dbussink dbussink added Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature) Component: Query Serving labels Jan 30, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Jan 30, 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 30, 2025
@dbussink dbussink removed NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required labels Jan 30, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v22.0.0 milestone Jan 30, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 30, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 67.75%. Comparing base (be677ef) to head (25ac865).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #17660      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   67.73%   67.75%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1586     1586              
  Lines      255770   255772       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits       173249   173295      +46     
+ Misses      82521    82477      -44     

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

@dbussink dbussink removed the NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request label Jan 31, 2025
@dbussink dbussink merged commit cb7d61a into vitessio:main Jan 31, 2025
106 of 116 checks passed
@dbussink dbussink deleted the dbussink/handle-percona-column-compressed branch January 31, 2025 12:03
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.

Bug Report: vtgates crash on start due to column_format compressed
3 participants