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

Cleanup usage of FLUSH PRIVILEGES #15700

Merged

Conversation

dbussink
Copy link
Contributor

We can remove usage of FLUSH PRIVILEGES in many places by making sure we only use the correct SQL functionality for managing users. If we don't modify the mysql.user table directly, we don't need to use FLUSH PRIVILEGES.

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

We can remove usage of `FLUSH PRIVILEGES` in many places by making sure
we only use the correct SQL functionality for managing users. If we
don't modify the `mysql.user` table directly, we don't need to use
`FLUSH PRIVILEGES`.

Signed-off-by: Dirkjan Bussink <[email protected]>
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Apr 11, 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 Apr 11, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v20.0.0 milestone Apr 11, 2024
# Care should be taken to change these users and passwords
# for production.
###############################################################################

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we want to keep this warning? We no longer have static secrets in this file anymore, which is a really good thing so the current warning is no longer accurate.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we can/should remove it.

@dbussink dbussink 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 Apr 11, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 11, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 68.39%. Comparing base (f118ba2) to head (c2fec20).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #15700      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   68.40%   68.39%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1556     1556              
  Lines      195121   195121              
==========================================
- Hits       133479   133450      -29     
- Misses      61642    61671      +29     

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

Copy link
Contributor

@mattlord mattlord left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks! ❤️

# Care should be taken to change these users and passwords
# for production.
###############################################################################

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we can/should remove it.

# Disable remote root access (only allow UNIX socket).
DELETE FROM mysql.user WHERE User = 'root' AND Host != 'localhost';
# Remove anonymous users & disable remote root access (only allow UNIX socket).
DROP USER IF EXISTS ''@'%', ''@'localhost', 'root'@'%';
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Technically this statement is not equivalent to the original one, because it will not remove e.g. 'root'@'10.0.0.1', but fine.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@shlomi-noach yeah, I don’t think they normally would exist by default right?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That's right. I think it's good to merge.

# Disable remote root access (only allow UNIX socket).
DELETE FROM mysql.user WHERE User = 'root' AND Host != 'localhost';
# Remove anonymous users & disable remote root access (only allow UNIX socket).
DROP USER IF EXISTS ''@'%', ''@'localhost', 'root'@'%';
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same. Not a concern as these are examples.

@dbussink dbussink merged commit ad0a508 into vitessio:main Apr 16, 2024
106 of 113 checks passed
@dbussink dbussink deleted the dbussink/cleanup-flush-privileges branch April 16, 2024 06:00
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Component: General Changes throughout the code base Type: Internal Cleanup
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants