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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Add no_scatter flag to vttestserver #15670

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 10, 2024
Merged

Add no_scatter flag to vttestserver #15670

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 10, 2024

Conversation

aparajon
Copy link
Contributor

@aparajon aparajon commented Apr 5, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Description

This PR adds the flag no_scatter to vttestserver, which will cause scatter queries to automatically fail when set. This behavior is useful for detecting / preventing scatter queries early in a test environment.

Note that this flag already exists in vtcombo.

Related Issue(s)

Fixes #15683

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

@vitess-bot vitess-bot
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Apr 5, 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 Apr 5, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v20.0.0 milestone Apr 5, 2024
@aparajon
Add no_scatter flag to vttestserver
4ac36dc 
Signed-off-by: Armand Parajon <armand@squareup.com>
@aparajon aparajon force-pushed the add-no-scatter-flag-to-vttestserver branch from 9b3b398 to 4ac36dc Compare April 5, 2024 23:24
@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 5, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 68.12%. Comparing base (4a1870a) to head (4ac36dc).
Report is 9 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #15670      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   68.13%   68.12%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1556     1556              
  Lines      195028   195029       +1     
==========================================
- Hits       132888   132856      -32     
- Misses      62140    62173      +33

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

@aparajon aparajon marked this pull request as ready for review April 6, 2024 00:00
mattlord
mattlord approved these changes Apr 8, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@mattlord mattlord left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. Thank you for the contribution @aparajon ! ❤️

go/cmd/vttestserver/cli/main.go
@@ -224,6 +224,8 @@ func New() (cmd *cobra.Command) {
cmd.Flags().DurationVar(&config.VtgateTabletRefreshInterval, "tablet_refresh_interval", 10*time.Second, "Interval at which vtgate refreshes tablet information from topology server.")

cmd.Flags().BoolVar(&doCreateTCPUser, "initialize-with-vt-dba-tcp", false, "If this flag is enabled, MySQL will be initialized with an additional user named vt_dba_tcp, who will have access via TCP/IP connection.")

cmd.Flags().BoolVar(&config.NoScatter, "no_scatter", false, "when set to true, the planner will fail instead of producing a plan that includes scatter queries")
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We are supposed to use dashes instead of underscores for new flags but this isn't really a new flag but rather we're adding it to another binary and having uniformity is better/nicer for it IMO. So I think this is fine. 🙂

@mattlord mattlord added Type: Testing Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature) and removed NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels Apr 8, 2024
@mattlord
Copy link
Contributor

mattlord commented Apr 8, 2024

Just noting that IMO it's OK that there's no issue here since this is only testing/vttestserver related. That being said, it would be ideal if you could create a real quick issue about why this is helpful (largely cut and paste from the description) and then add "Fixes " in the description @aparajon 🙏 We try to do this for virtually all PRs so that it's easier to find in the changelogs, feature searches, etc. Thanks again!

@aparajon aparajon mentioned this pull request Apr 9, 2024
Closed
@aparajon
Copy link
Contributor Author

aparajon commented Apr 9, 2024

Just noting that IMO it's OK that there's no issue here since this is only testing/vttestserver related. That being said, it would be ideal if you could create a real quick issue about why this is helpful (largely cut and paste from the description) and then add "Fixes " in the description @aparajon 🙏 We try to do this for virtually all PRs so that it's easier to find in the changelogs, feature searches, etc. Thanks again!

Thanks for the review @mattlord! Created and linked an issue

@mattlord mattlord added Component: vttestserver and removed NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request labels Apr 9, 2024
@dbussink dbussink merged commit b277107 into vitessio:main Apr 10, 2024
103 of 110 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@mattlord mattlord mattlord approved these changes

@dbussink dbussink dbussink approved these changes

@ajm188 ajm188 Awaiting requested review from ajm188 ajm188 is a code owner

@deepthi deepthi Awaiting requested review from deepthi deepthi is a code owner

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Component: vttestserver Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature) Type: Testing
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v20.0.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Feature Request: Add no_scatter flag to vttestserver
3 participants
@aparajon @mattlord @dbussink