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

Planner cleaning: cleanup and refactor #16569

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Aug 15, 2024
Merged

Conversation

systay
Copy link
Collaborator

@systay systay commented Aug 9, 2024

Description

While working on #16427, I've stumbled across quite a few annoyances in the code that needed fixing before we could finish the CTE work. Instead of making that PR even bigger, I'm extracting all the clean ups into this PR.

The kind of clean ups are:

  • Use AddWSColumn instead of AddColumn to add weight_strings.
  • Don't push down literals - just evaluate them in the vtgate

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

Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Aug 9, 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 Aug 9, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v21.0.0 milestone Aug 9, 2024
@systay systay added Type: Internal Cleanup 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 Aug 9, 2024
@systay systay marked this pull request as ready for review August 9, 2024 08:44
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 9, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 97.65625% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 68.83%. Comparing base (cc68dd5) to head (4451af6).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files Patch % Lines
go/vt/vtgate/planbuilder/operators/aggregator.go 94.44% 1 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtgate/planbuilder/operators/apply_join.go 83.33% 1 Missing ⚠️
...vtgate/planbuilder/operators/projection_pushing.go 96.55% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #16569      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   68.85%   68.83%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files        1557     1557              
  Lines      199891   199983      +92     
==========================================
+ Hits       137644   137659      +15     
- Misses      62247    62324      +77     

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

@systay systay requested a review from deepthi as a code owner August 10, 2024 09:18
@systay systay mentioned this pull request Aug 14, 2024
5 tasks
Copy link
Member

@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Rest LGTM

go/vt/vtgate/planbuilder/operators/projection_pushing.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
go/vt/vtgate/planbuilder/operators/projection_pushing.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>
@systay systay merged commit be95882 into vitessio:main Aug 15, 2024
129 checks passed
@systay systay deleted the clean-refactor branch August 15, 2024 07:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants