VReplication: Qualify and SQL escape tables in created AutoIncrement VSchema definitions

[mattlord]

Description

This is a follow-up to #16860 that addresses a couple of potential edge cases when we automatically replace the auto increment handling:

1. The sequence table name in the VSchema AutoIncrement definition needs to be SQL escaped as it contains e.g. dashes
2. The sequence table name is not unique across the Vitess cluster

This PR addresses those respectively by 1) ensuring that the sequence table name is always properly SQL escaped 2) qualifying the sequence table with the keyspace and ensuring that the keyspace name is also properly SQL escaped.

I think that we should backport this to v21 as it heads off potential bugs related to keyspaces and table names that must be SQL escaped along with potential bugs related to the non-qualified generated sequence names NOT being unique across all keyspaces in the Vitess cluster.

Related Issue(s)

• Fixes: Feature Request: qualify generated sequence table name #17173

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

[vitess-bot]

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.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 60.00000% with 10 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 67.44%. Comparing base (9946ce8) to head (80745b4).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
go/vt/vtctl/workflow/materializer.go	64.70%	6 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtctl/workflow/utils.go	50.00%	4 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #17174      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.45%   67.44%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1569     1569              
  Lines      252229   252244      +15     
==========================================
- Hits       170150   170124      -26     
- Misses      82079    82120      +41     

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

[notfelineit]

🥳