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

[16.0] bugfixes: collection of fixes to bugs found while fuzzing #13805

Merged

Conversation

systay
Copy link
Collaborator

@systay systay commented Aug 17, 2023

Description

Fixes three one-line issues.

  1. Join predicates on outer joins that only depend on the RHS of the join turns join into an inner join
  2. Projection not handling types correctly would fail some aggregation queries
  3. Filter checking if values are 1 instead of using MySQLs coercion to bool

Related Issue(s)

This was found with automated query fuzzing (#13279)
Backport of #13332

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

…3332)

* bugfix: left join predicate only depending on RHS turns into inner join

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <andres@planetscale.com>

* bugfix: use the incoming type fields to calculate the outgoing types

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <andres@planetscale.com>

* bugfix: filter was using wrong method on evalengine

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <andres@planetscale.com>

---------

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <andres@planetscale.com>
@vitess-bot
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Aug 17, 2023

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 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 17, 2023
@systay systay 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 labels Aug 17, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v16.0.4 milestone Aug 17, 2023
Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <andres@planetscale.com>
@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 mentioned this pull request Aug 17, 2023
14 tasks
Signed-off-by: Manan Gupta <manan@planetscale.com>
@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 merged commit bafc21d into vitessio:release-16.0 Aug 18, 2023
111 of 112 checks passed
@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 deleted the fix-inconsistencies-16 branch August 18, 2023 09:02
@hmaurer hmaurer mentioned this pull request Mar 21, 2024
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