Skip to content

[Direct PR] (v16) VDiff: add support for tables with no primary keys #18127

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
Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: release-16.0
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

[Direct PR] (v16) VDiff: add support for tables with no primary keys #18127

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

rohit-nayak-ps
Copy link
Contributor

@rohit-nayak-ps rohit-nayak-ps commented Apr 7, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Description

Tables with no PKs were not supported in v16. This PR adds support for users who want to migrate to new MySQL versions, for example, to eventually migrate to newer Vitess versions.

It essentially treats all columns as part of the primary key.

Related Issue(s)

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 7, 2025

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 7, 2025
@rohit-nayak-ps rohit-nayak-ps added Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature) Component: VReplication and 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 NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required labels Apr 7, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@deepthi deepthi Awaiting requested review from deepthi deepthi will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for review deepthi is a code owner

@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 Awaiting requested review from GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for review GuptaManan100 is a code owner

@rsajwani rsajwani Awaiting requested review from rsajwani rsajwani will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for review rsajwani is a code owner

@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach Awaiting requested review from shlomi-noach shlomi-noach will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for review shlomi-noach is a code owner

At least 2 approving reviews are required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Component: VReplication Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature)
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
1 participant
@rohit-nayak-ps