Merged
Conversation
chenrui333
approved these changes
Feb 20, 2026
Contributor
|
🤖 An automated task has requested bottles to be published to this PR. Caution Please do not push to this PR branch before the bottle commits have been pushed, as this results in a state that is difficult to recover from. If you need to resolve a merge conflict, please use a merge commit. Do not force-push to this PR branch. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Created by
brew bumpCreated with
brew bump-formula-pr.Details
release notes
go-mysql-server
sql.StringTypeinterface forsystemStringTypefixes dolthub/dolt#10534
part of dolthub/dolt#10535
fixes dolthub/dolt#10527
Using the index of the first found
.rune as an offset to get an index column name was causing column names to not be correctly matched when the table name contained periods. Using the length of the table name as an offset avoids this issue and is also slightly more performant.In a join node, the
scopeLenvariable is the total number of columns that represent values from outer scopes.Previously, we set this value equal to the number of columns in the immediate parent scope. When there are multiple nested scopes, this value is incorrect.
This PR adds an example of when this matters: a non-lateral join in multiple nested scopes would return an incorrect number of columns. A projection above this join would then index into this returned row, resulting in an out-of-bounds error.
Vector indexes require NOT NULL columns, similar to spatial indexes. Previously, creating a vector index on a nullable column was silently accepted, which could cause runtime panics if any of the elements were NULL.
This adds validation in both the analyzer (CREATE TABLE) and DDL execution (CREATE INDEX / ALTER TABLE) paths, returning a clear error message.
There were several problems with the previous join iterator implementation:
The behavior with subqueries is the main motivation for this PR.
Previously, in order to expose values from outer scopes to iterators, we would dynamically inject PrependNodes into subquery build plans. These nodes would insert values into the beginning of returned rows, allowing parent iterators to read them and use them in expressions. To compensate for this, we would also inject StripRowNodes into joins. StripRowNodes are the opposite of PrependNodes, removing columns from their iterators.
This logic was incredibly difficult to reason about correctly:
-- Lateral joins would re-include all the values from the outermost scope in the next scope, effectively doubling the number of columns with each nesting level.
-- StripRowNodes would only be generated based on the innermost scope, resulting in some injected values not being removed.
-- StripRowNodes would be generated under each join node, including between join nodes in a multi-table join. Join nodes would thus would need to re-insert these values in order to compensate... but were expected to not re-insert columns corresponding to values defined by a parent join node, except for lateral joins... reasoning about this correctly quickly becomes untenable.
Ultimately, there's no reason why join nodes can't handle this directly. And removing the StripRowNodes type and replacing it with logic in the join iterators actually makes the logic much more consistent: Parent iterators should assume that all child iterators contain prepended values for outer scopes, and values determined by the node's schema, and nothing else. And the parent iterator returns rows that also have this property.
Wrapping subquery nodes in a
Limitnode before checking if it was aSubqueryAliaswas causing us to not findSubqueryAliasnodes. This was noticed when investigating dolthub/dolt#10472. We should probably be inspecting the whole node instead of simply checking the node type, but this is a quick fix.filed dolthub/dolt#10494 to add better test coverage and address TODOs
Closed Issues
View the full release notes at https://github.com/dolthub/dolt/releases/tag/v1.82.3.