-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 642
MySQL: CREATE INDEx
: allow USING
clause before ON
#2029
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
let concurrently = self.parse_keyword(Keyword::CONCURRENTLY); | ||
let if_not_exists = self.parse_keywords(&[Keyword::IF, Keyword::NOT, Keyword::EXISTS]); | ||
|
||
let mut using = None; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not a fan of this mut
but also not a fan of returning a tuple of (index_name, using) at line 7067.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Seems okay IMO.
let concurrently = self.parse_keyword(Keyword::CONCURRENTLY); | ||
let if_not_exists = self.parse_keywords(&[Keyword::IF, Keyword::NOT, Keyword::EXISTS]); | ||
|
||
let mut using = None; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Seems okay IMO.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Great, thanks!
None | ||
}; | ||
|
||
using = self.parse_optional_using_then_index_type()?.or(using); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should this be something like
using = using.or_else(|| self.parse_optional_using_then_index_type()).transpose()?;
in that we should only look to parse again if we didn't parse a value already?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As Michael pointed out earlier, MySQL does allow having two "USING" clauses. In that case, the second one overwrites the first.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Might be worth a comment on this line, because at first glance (or if you haven't tried it on MySQL yourself) it does seem backwards 😛
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah I see, double checking do the tests include the scenario where two USING
clauses are specified? If not we can probably add those
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good point. Added a second test with two USING
clauses. Force-pushed to resolve conflicts and squashed the commits.
CREATE INDEx
: allow USING
clause before ON
cad1ec4
to
bcc9f7a
Compare
MySQL allows specifying the index type `USING index_type` before the `ON` clause in `CREATE INDEX` statements. This PR allows the `CREATE INDEX` parser to accept both positions of the `USING` clause, regardless of the dialect. docs: https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.4/en/create-index.html
bcc9f7a
to
c6a3910
Compare
MySQL allows specifying the index type
USING index_type
before theON
clause inCREATE INDEX
statements.This PR allows the
CREATE INDEX
parser to accept both positions of theUSING
clause, regardless of the dialect.docs: https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.4/en/create-index.html