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

[BugFix] fix partial update failure due to column name case #53656

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 6, 2024

Conversation

luohaha
Copy link
Contributor

@luohaha luohaha commented Dec 6, 2024

Why I'm doing:

Partial update fail in this case: #53655
This is because in UpdatePlaner.java:

for (Column column : targetTable.getFullSchema()) {
                if (updateStmt.usePartialUpdate() && !column.isGeneratedColumn() &&
                        !updateStmt.isAssignmentColumn(column.getName()) && !column.isKey()) {
                    // When using partial update, skip columns which aren't key column and not be assign, except for
                    // generated column
                    continue;
                }

!updateStmt.isAssignmentColumn(column.getName()) is case-sensitively, so if the update column name are not same as which it was defined when create table, it will generate wrong plan. E.g.

CREATE TABLE employees (
    EmployeeID INT,
    Name VARCHAR(50),
    Salary DECIMAL(10, 2)
)

If you update salary instead of Salary, it will fail with number of exprs is not same with slots backend.

What I'm doing:

Update planner treats column names case-sensitively, which can lead to incorrect execution plans.

This pull request introduces improvements to the handling of column updates in SQL statements and adds corresponding test cases. The most important changes include modifying how assignment columns are stored, adding a new test method for partial updates, and creating new test scripts for upper-case partial updates.

Enhancements to column updates:

New test cases for partial updates:

New test scripts for upper-case partial updates:

Fixes #53655

What type of PR is this:

  • BugFix
  • Feature
  • Enhancement
  • Refactor
  • UT
  • Doc
  • Tool

Does this PR entail a change in behavior?

  • Yes, this PR will result in a change in behavior.
  • No, this PR will not result in a change in behavior.

If yes, please specify the type of change:

  • Interface/UI changes: syntax, type conversion, expression evaluation, display information
  • Parameter changes: default values, similar parameters but with different default values
  • Policy changes: use new policy to replace old one, functionality automatically enabled
  • Feature removed
  • Miscellaneous: upgrade & downgrade compatibility, etc.

Checklist:

  • I have added test cases for my bug fix or my new feature
  • This pr needs user documentation (for new or modified features or behaviors)
    • I have added documentation for my new feature or new function
  • This is a backport pr

Bugfix cherry-pick branch check:

  • I have checked the version labels which the pr will be auto-backported to the target branch
    • 3.4
    • 3.3
    • 3.2
    • 3.1
    • 3.0

@luohaha luohaha requested a review from a team as a code owner December 6, 2024 06:25
@mergify mergify bot assigned luohaha Dec 6, 2024
@wyb wyb enabled auto-merge (squash) December 6, 2024 07:18
@luohaha luohaha force-pushed the fix-update-planner branch from 68373d0 to 213179e Compare December 6, 2024 08:49
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Dec 6, 2024

[Java-Extensions Incremental Coverage Report]

pass : 0 / 0 (0%)

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Dec 6, 2024

[FE Incremental Coverage Report]

pass : 1 / 1 (100.00%)

file detail

path covered_line new_line coverage not_covered_line_detail
🔵 com/starrocks/sql/ast/UpdateStmt.java 1 1 100.00% []

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Dec 6, 2024

[BE Incremental Coverage Report]

pass : 0 / 0 (0%)

Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Dec 6, 2024

@wyb wyb merged commit 885ed27 into StarRocks:main Dec 6, 2024
40 checks passed
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Dec 6, 2024

@Mergifyio backport branch-3.4

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the 3.4 label Dec 6, 2024
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Dec 6, 2024

@Mergifyio backport branch-3.3

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the 3.3 label Dec 6, 2024
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Dec 6, 2024

@Mergifyio backport branch-3.2

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the 3.2 label Dec 6, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Dec 6, 2024

backport branch-3.4

✅ Backports have been created

Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Dec 6, 2024

backport branch-3.3

✅ Backports have been created

Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Dec 6, 2024

backport branch-3.2

✅ Backports have been created

@luohaha
Copy link
Contributor Author

luohaha commented Dec 27, 2024

https://github.com/apps/mergify backport branch-3.1

@luohaha
Copy link
Contributor Author

luohaha commented Dec 27, 2024

https://github.com/Mergifyio backport branch-3.1

Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Dec 27, 2024

backport branch-3.1

✅ Backports have been created

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.

[Bug] partial update fail because of number of exprs is not same with slots
4 participants