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.

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

Always return a valid timezone in cursor #17546

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 16, 2025

Conversation

dbussink
Copy link
Contributor

Conversion functions into a Go time.Time expect to have a valid *time.Location and will panic if passed in nil.

Before we used also here nil to signal no timezone is set (and thus falling back to time.Local implicitly, but it's better to always return a timezone explicitly and use time.Local where appropriate then.

Related Issue(s)

Fixes #17545

Marked also for back porting as this can panic.

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

Conversion functions into a Go `time.Time` expect to have a valid
`*time.Location` and will panic if passed in `nil`.

Before we used also here `nil` to signal no timezone is set (and thus
falling back to `time.Local` implicitly, but it's better to always
return a timezone explicitly and use `time.Local` where appropriate
then.

Signed-off-by: Dirkjan Bussink <[email protected]>
@dbussink dbussink added Type: Bug Component: Query Serving Backport to: release-19.0 Needs to be back ported to release-19.0 Backport to: release-20.0 Needs to be backport to release-20.0 Backport to: release-21.0 Needs to be backport to release-21.0 labels Jan 15, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Jan 15, 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 Jan 15, 2025
@dbussink dbussink 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 Jan 15, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v22.0.0 milestone Jan 15, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 15, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 75.00000% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 67.70%. Comparing base (301c92c) to head (f33200f).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
go/vt/vtgate/executorcontext/safe_session.go 66.66% 2 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #17546      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   67.68%   67.70%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1584     1584              
  Lines      254717   254718       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits       172417   172465      +48     
+ Misses      82300    82253      -47     

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

@dbussink dbussink merged commit 5468f5d into vitessio:main Jan 16, 2025
118 checks passed
rohit-nayak-ps pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 16, 2025
)

Signed-off-by: Dirkjan Bussink <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: vitess-bot[bot] <108069721+vitess-bot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
rohit-nayak-ps pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 16, 2025
)

Signed-off-by: Dirkjan Bussink <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: vitess-bot[bot] <108069721+vitess-bot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Backport to: release-19.0 Needs to be back ported to release-19.0 Backport to: release-20.0 Needs to be backport to release-20.0 Backport to: release-21.0 Needs to be backport to release-21.0 Component: Query Serving Type: Bug
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Bug Report: Panic inside evalengine for time related functions if no explicit timezone is set
3 participants