forked from vitessio/vitess
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
vtgateproxy v19 buildable and passing tests #594
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
c659723
get v19 to build (WIP)
dedelala 17dd1c6
sort of builds?
dedelala 360680b
misnamed flag
dedelala f9cd529
flag name
dedelala 28fd7fc
remove binary
dedelala 11d8a8b
update go-mysql-driver
dedelala 0c097e9
return ErrNoSubConnAvailable for no available connections
dedelala File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Binary file not shown.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Somewhat minor question but actually a bit thought provoking as well...
Suppose this parsing fails for whatever reason. Is it better to fail (as you did here) or just fall through and call
session.Executebelow? Since the whole point of thisusestatement hijacking is to avoid a round trip, if for some rare reason vtgate is able to process it but the proxy isn't then could we be unnecesarily failing?Then again maybe the case where we can't unescape an ID is rare enough that it's just plain irrelevant?
@henryr curious about your thoughts as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's ok to fail. I think it's just as likely that we create a dependency elsewhere in the proxy where we assume that we've always successfully intercepted
usestatements, as a situation arises where we can't unescape the argument.