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

Remove the 200 indentation limit in the SQL parser #13158

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 26, 2023

Conversation

frouioui
Copy link
Member

@frouioui frouioui commented May 25, 2023

Description

This PR removes the indentation limit of 200 which was introduced 8 years ago in #845. The original reason for this limit was to prevent stack overflow, however, there is little chance to reach stack overflow. There are already a lot of possibilities to OOM the VTGate by sending weird queries.

cc @arthurschreiber @GuptaManan100

Related Issue(s)

Fixes: #13159

Checklist

  • "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported
  • Tests were added or are not required
  • Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on the CI
  • Documentation was added or is not required

Deployment Notes

Signed-off-by: Florent Poinsard <florent.poinsard@outlook.fr>
@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot added 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 May 25, 2023
@vitess-bot
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented May 25, 2023

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • If this is a change that users need to know about, please apply the release notes (needs details) label so that merging is blocked unless the summary release notes document is included.
  • If a test is added or modified, there should be a documentation on top of the test to explain what the expected behavior is what the test does.

If a new flag is being introduced:

  • Is it really necessary to add this flag?
  • Flag names should be clear and intuitive (as far as possible)
  • Help text should be descriptive.
  • Flag names should use dashes (-) as word separators rather than underscores (_).

If a workflow is added or modified:

  • Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
  • If the workflow should be required, the maintainer team should be notified.

Bug fixes

  • There should be at least one unit or end-to-end test.
  • The Pull Request description should include a link to an issue that describes the bug.

Non-trivial changes

  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.

New/Existing features

  • Should be documented, either by modifying the existing documentation or creating new documentation.
  • New features should have a link to a feature request issue or an RFC that documents the use cases, corner cases and test cases.

Backward compatibility

  • Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
  • Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
  • vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.
  • RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
  • If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from VTop, if used there.

@frouioui frouioui added Type: Bug Component: Query Serving Backport to: release-15.0 and removed NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels May 25, 2023
@frouioui frouioui requested a review from arthurschreiber May 25, 2023 16:44
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v17.0.0 milestone May 25, 2023
@frouioui frouioui removed the NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request label May 25, 2023
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.

We should add a passing test that has an indentation of over 200 just to make sure it works and we don't end up breaking it in the future.

@frouioui
Copy link
Member Author

We should add a passing test that has an indentation of over 200 just to make sure it works and we don't end up breaking it in the future.

There is one already in go/vt/sqlparser/parse_test.go.

@frouioui frouioui merged commit dafc82f into vitessio:main May 26, 2023
@frouioui frouioui deleted the fix-indentation-limit branch May 26, 2023 14:31
@vitess-bot
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented May 26, 2023

I was unable to backport this Pull Request to the following branches: release-15.0, release-16.0.

frouioui added a commit to planetscale/vitess that referenced this pull request May 26, 2023
Signed-off-by: Florent Poinsard <florent.poinsard@outlook.fr>
frouioui added a commit to planetscale/vitess that referenced this pull request May 26, 2023
Signed-off-by: Florent Poinsard <florent.poinsard@outlook.fr>
@GuptaManan100
Copy link
Member

@frouioui Could you point me to it? All I see is a test that was failing on max nesting is not failing on syntax error but I don't see a passing test.

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 Report: max nesting level reached on query with many nested OR operators
3 participants