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: Implement INSTR #15127

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

beingnoble03
Copy link
Member

Description

This PR adds implementation of INSTR func in evalengine.

Related Issue(s)

Fixes part of #9647

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: Noble Mittal <noblemittal@outlook.com>
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Feb 4, 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 Feb 4, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v19.0.0 milestone Feb 4, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 4, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: 20 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (77dc0c9) 47.70% compared to head (91f4c5b) 40.89%.
Report is 23 commits behind head on main.

Files Patch % Lines
go/vt/vtgate/evalengine/fn_string.go 76.74% 5 Missing and 5 partials ⚠️
go/vt/vtgate/evalengine/cached_size.go 0.00% 8 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtgate/evalengine/translate_builtin.go 50.00% 1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #15127       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   47.70%   40.89%    -6.81%     
===========================================
  Files        1155     1454      +299     
  Lines      240218   368302   +128084     
===========================================
+ Hits       114593   150616    +36023     
- Misses     117020   201493    +84473     
- Partials     8605    16193     +7588     

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

@systay systay added Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature) 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 Feb 5, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@dbussink dbussink left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The current implementation here is wrong and we need to add support for finding substrings to the collations package in order to properly support this.

substr.bytes = bytes.ToLower(substr.bytes)
}

pos := bytes.Index(str.bytes, substr.bytes) + 1
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There's a reason why INSTR is not implemented yet, and that is that we need to add functionality to the go/mysql/collations package to do the searching for a substring. This implementation here is wrong and doesn't consider collations correctly. It assumes that it's all only ASCII by the ToLower and doesn't handle non ASCII characters this way, nor does it handle any of the non-Unicode encodings here.

@beingnoble03
Copy link
Member Author

Oh I see. Thanks for the explanation. Closing this one.

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.

3 participants