From: Peter Gulutzan <pgulutzan@ocelot.ca>
To: Mergen Imeev <imeevma@tarantool.org>,
Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>,
Nikita Pettik <korablev@tarantool.org>,
kyukhin@tarantool.org, tsafin@tarantool.org,
sergos@tarantool.org
Cc: tarantool-discussions@dev.tarantool.org
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-discussions] SQL built-in functions position
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2020 14:56:22 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9a788a90-f558-fc6c-1d28-2813e8b721f8@ocelot.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <66362762-8791-bea3-745f-afc1e3eaa199@tarantool.org>
Hi,
On 2020-09-27 9:18 a.m., Mergen Imeev wrote:
> Hi all. I have a question that I would like to discuss.
>
> The question is about SQL built-in functions. At the moment these
functions are
> partially described in _func and partially in src/box/sql/func.c. I
received two
> completely different suggestions from my reviewers on what to do with
these
> functions:
> 1) Move definitions completely to _func. Remove definitions from func.c.
> 2) Move definitions completely to func.c. Remove definitions from _func.
>
> In the first case, users will be able to see the function
definitions. Also, in
> the future, we may allow these functions to be called from Lua
(although not
> sure if this is necessary). The main idea is 'all functions have the same
> interface'.
>
> In the second case, the implementation is simpler, and we can more easily
> implement some features, such as "virtual" functions. For users, the
definition
> can only be seen in the documentation. The main idea is 'SQL built-in
functions
> are part of SQL'.
>
> Which of these approaches do you think is more beneficial to us?
>
I hope you will say _func.
The current built-in functions are harmless, except perhaps for
RANDOMBLOB with a huge value.
However, in future maybe there will be built-in functions that should
require privileges.
In that case, I believe, they will have to be in _func (and someday in
_vfunc)
so that grant() will work for them.
I have tried to redirect the UPPER() function in order to violate
security, thus:
"
tarantool> function UPPER(x) return x end
---
...
tarantool> box.schema.func.create('UPPER')
---
- error: Function 'UPPER' already exists
...
tarantool> box.schema.func.drop('UPPER')
---
- error: 'Can''t drop function 1: function is SQL built-in'
...
"
This is good behaviour and I think it works because UPPER() is in _func.
I did not document in the manual's SQL section that built-in functions will
be in _func, so removing them is not a regression from documented behaviour.
Also I acknowledge that they don't exist in MySQL/MariaDB
information_schema.routines.
But I think users benefit from being able to see them.
Peter Gulutzan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-27 20:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-27 15:18 Mergen Imeev
2020-09-27 20:56 ` Peter Gulutzan [this message]
2020-09-28 20:07 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy
2020-09-29 19:22 ` Peter Gulutzan
2020-09-28 18:19 ` Nikita Pettik
2020-09-28 20:07 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy
2020-09-28 20:07 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy
2020-10-01 14:46 ` Kirill Yukhin
2020-10-01 21:15 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy
2020-10-02 15:18 ` Mergen Imeev
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9a788a90-f558-fc6c-1d28-2813e8b721f8@ocelot.ca \
--to=pgulutzan@ocelot.ca \
--cc=imeevma@tarantool.org \
--cc=korablev@tarantool.org \
--cc=kyukhin@tarantool.org \
--cc=sergos@tarantool.org \
--cc=tarantool-discussions@dev.tarantool.org \
--cc=tsafin@tarantool.org \
--cc=v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org \
--subject='Re: [Tarantool-discussions] SQL built-in functions position' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox