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