feat: [#280] Implement Sqlserver driver #726
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes introduce a comprehensive SQL Server implementation within the database schema management framework. A new Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
hwbrzzl
force-pushed
the
bowen/#280-21
branch
from
9f58d42
to
e32eb5e
Compare
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #726 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 69.83% 69.61% -0.22%
==========================================
Files 205 210 +5
Lines 16396 16583 +187
==========================================
+ Hits 11450 11545 +95
- Misses 4303 4389 +86
- Partials 643 649 +6 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 7
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (17)
database/schema/processors/sqlserver.go (1)
1-16: Consider adding tests and documenting error handling.As this is part of the SQL Server driver implementation:
- Ensure comprehensive test coverage for this processor
- Document any SQL Server specific index processing behaviors or limitations
- Consider adding godoc comments for better documentation
database/schema/processors/utils.go (1)
13-13: Consider trimming whitespace from column names.The current implementation might be sensitive to whitespace in column names.
Add whitespace trimming for each column:
- Columns: strings.Split(dbIndex.Columns, ","), + Columns: func(cols string) []string { + split := strings.Split(cols, ",") + for i, col := range split { + split[i] = strings.TrimSpace(col) + } + return split + }(dbIndex.Columns),database/schema/processors/utils_test.go (2)
22-22: Well-structured shared utility implementation.The use of
processIndexesas a shared utility function is a good architectural decision. It promotes:
- Code reuse across different database implementations
- Consistent index processing behavior
- Easier maintenance and testing
Also applies to: 29-29
Based on the implementation and existing tests, I can now provide a final response about the test coverage for edge cases:
Additional test coverage needed for index processing
The current test coverage is incomplete. While it covers:
- Basic functionality with valid indexes (multiple columns)
- Empty input case
- Primary indexes (in sqlite tests)
The following edge cases are not tested but should be based on the implementation in
processIndexes:
- Single column indexes (since
strings.Splitis used on the Columns field)- Indexes with special characters in names (since
strings.ToLoweris used)- Unique indexes (the
Uniquefield exists but is not tested)- Indexes with empty/invalid column lists
- Indexes with empty/invalid types
Example test cases should be added to
database/schema/processors/utils_test.gosince it contains the coreprocessIndexesfunction used by all database processors.🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint
12-31: Verify test coverage for edge cases.While the test covers basic functionality (valid indexes) and empty input, consider adding test cases for:
- Indexes with single column
- Indexes with special characters in names
- Indexes with duplicate names
- Invalid index types
Let's check if these edge cases are covered in other test files:
Let me analyze the test coverage for edge cases in the index-related tests based on the search results.
From the search results, I found two relevant test files:
database/schema/processors/utils_test.go- Tests basic functionality and empty inputdatabase/schema/processors/sqlite_test.go- Tests additional cases including primary indexesLet me verify if there are any other index-related test files:
Let me check the actual implementation of the index processing to understand what edge cases should be covered:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for additional index-related test cases across the codebase # Expected: Find test cases in mysql, postgres, or sqlserver test files that cover edge cases # Search for index-related test cases rg -l --type go 'func Test.*Index' database/ # Search for specific edge cases in existing tests rg -A 5 'Index.*Type.*:|Name.*:|Column.*:' database/ --type goLength of output: 132395
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for index-related test cases in test files rg -A 5 'func Test.*Index|test.*index' database/ --type goLength of output: 1020
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the implementation of processIndexes rg -A 10 'func.*processIndexes|func.*ProcessIndexes' database/schema/processors/ --type goLength of output: 4426
database/schema/sqserver_schema_test.go (2)
12-15: Consider adding documentation for the test suite structWhile the struct is straightforward, adding a brief comment describing its purpose would improve code documentation.
+// SqlserverSchemaSuite tests the SQL Server schema functionality type SqlserverSchemaSuite struct { suite.Suite sqlserverSchema *SqlserverSchema }
29-44: Enhance test coverage for schema parsingWhile the current test cases cover basic scenarios, consider adding more edge cases:
- Schema names with special characters
- Table names with special characters
- Invalid format handling
tests := []struct { reference string expectedSchema string expectedTable string }{ {"public.users", "public", "users"}, {"users", "", "users"}, + {"dbo.table-name", "dbo", "table-name"}, + {"schema.name.table", "", "schema.name.table"}, + {"[special schema].users", "special schema", "users"}, }database/schema/schema.go (1)
52-54: Consider enhancing SQL Server configuration validationWhile the implementation is solid, consider these architectural improvements:
- Add validation for SQL Server specific configuration parameters (e.g., port, authentication mode)
- Document the interface requirements for SQL Server components
- Consider adding configuration examples in the documentation
This will improve the robustness and usability of the SQL Server implementation.
database/schema/schema_test.go (2)
198-199: Consider adding test coverage for clustered indexesWhile the test correctly verifies that regular indexes are "nonclustered" by default in SQL Server, consider adding test coverage for clustered indexes as well. This would ensure comprehensive coverage of SQL Server's index types.
Example test case to add:
if driver == database.DriverSqlserver { err := schema.Create("clustered_indexes", func(table contractsschema.Blueprint) { table.ID() table.String("name") // Add method to specify clustered index table.Index("name").Clustered() }) s.Require().Nil(err) indexes, err := schema.GetIndexes("clustered_indexes") s.Require().Nil(err) for _, index := range indexes { if index.Name == "goravel_clustered_indexes_name_index" { s.Equal("clustered", index.Type) } } }
Line range hint
89-90: Track implementation of remaining test methodsThe TODO comments indicate pending implementations for:
DropAllTypestest after implementing create typeDropAllViewstest after implementing create viewThese implementations would be particularly relevant for SQL Server support as it has robust support for user-defined types and views.
Would you like me to:
- Create GitHub issues to track these implementations?
- Help implement these test methods?
Also applies to: 93-94
database/schema/grammars/sqlserver_test.go (6)
21-23: Add documentation for the table prefix.Consider adding a comment explaining the purpose of the "goravel_" prefix in the setup. This helps other developers understand the naming convention.
func (s *SqlserverSuite) SetupTest() { + // Initialize SQL Server grammar with "goravel_" prefix for table names s.grammar = NewSqlserver("goravel_") }
25-41: Add edge cases for TestCompileAdd.Consider adding test cases for:
- Column names with special characters
- Very long column names
- Maximum length string columns
92-137: Enhance TestCompileForeign with additional scenarios.The test covers basic foreign key scenarios, but consider adding cases for:
- Invalid/empty column names
- Non-existent reference tables
- Complex cascade scenarios (SET NULL, NO ACTION)
216-254: Document test scenarios in TestModifyDefault.While the table-driven tests are well-structured, consider adding comments to explain each test scenario's purpose and expected behavior.
tests := []struct { name string setup func() expectSql string }{ + // Test case: When default value is not specified, no default clause should be generated { name: "without change and default is nil", setup: func() { mockColumn.EXPECT().GetDefault().Return(nil).Once() }, }, + // Test case: When default value is specified, it should be properly quoted in the default clause { name: "without change and default is not nil", setup: func() { mockColumn.EXPECT().GetDefault().Return("goravel").Twice() }, expectSql: " default 'goravel'", }, }
279-289: Add boundary tests for TypeString.The current tests cover basic scenarios, but consider adding tests for:
- Maximum allowed length for nvarchar
- Empty string handling
- Unicode string handling
1-289: Well-structured test suite with comprehensive coverage.The test suite effectively validates SQL Server grammar implementation with proper mocking and assertions. Consider the following architectural improvements:
- Create shared test utilities for common mock setups
- Consider parameterizing tests with a shared test data provider
- Add integration tests alongside these unit tests to validate actual SQL Server behavior
database/schema/sqlserver_schema.go (2)
31-41: Consider wrapping operations inDropAllTableswithin a transactionCurrently,
DropAllTablesexecutes commands to drop foreign keys and tables separately. If an error occurs after dropping foreign keys but before dropping tables, the database could be left in an inconsistent state. Consider wrapping these operations in a transaction to ensure atomicity.
47-51: Consider wrapping operation inDropAllViewswithin a transactionSimilar to
DropAllTables, wrapping theDropAllViewsoperation in a transaction can help maintain database consistency in case of errors during execution.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (12)
database/schema/grammars/sqlserver.go(1 hunks)database/schema/grammars/sqlserver_test.go(1 hunks)database/schema/processors/mysql.go(1 hunks)database/schema/processors/postgres.go(1 hunks)database/schema/processors/postgres_test.go(0 hunks)database/schema/processors/sqlserver.go(1 hunks)database/schema/processors/utils.go(1 hunks)database/schema/processors/utils_test.go(2 hunks)database/schema/schema.go(1 hunks)database/schema/schema_test.go(3 hunks)database/schema/sqlserver_schema.go(1 hunks)database/schema/sqserver_schema_test.go(1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- database/schema/processors/postgres_test.go
🔇 Additional comments (18)
database/schema/processors/mysql.go (1)
15-15: LGTM! Good refactoring to reduce code duplication.
The change to use a shared processIndexes function improves code maintainability by centralizing the index processing logic.
Let's verify that MySQL-specific index cases are still handled correctly:
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the index processing implementation and tests.
Let me check one more thing to understand the shared index processing implementation and MySQL-specific handling.
Based on the gathered information, I can now provide the final response:
The shared index processing implementation is safe for MySQL
The processIndexes function in utils.go performs a straightforward transformation of database indexes that is database-agnostic:
- It handles common index properties (name, type, columns, primary, unique)
- The implementation maintains case sensitivity through explicit case conversion
- No special handling is required for MySQL as the base properties are universal
The refactoring is safe as it doesn't remove or modify any MySQL-specific behavior, it simply standardizes the common index processing logic.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for MySQL-specific index handling in tests and implementation
# Check if there are MySQL-specific test cases
echo "Checking for MySQL-specific index tests..."
rg -l "TestMysql.*Index" --type go
# Look for any MySQL-specific index handling in the shared implementation
echo "Checking for MySQL-specific handling in processIndexes..."
rg "mysql|MySQL" --type go database/schema/processors/utils.go
# Check for any existing issues or discussions about MySQL index handling
echo "Checking for related issues..."
gh issue list --search "mysql index"
Length of output: 431
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the implementation of processIndexes and related test files
echo "Checking processIndexes implementation..."
ast-grep --pattern 'func processIndexes($$$) {
$$$
}'
echo "\nChecking MySQL processor tests..."
fd test.*go$ --type f --exec rg -l "mysql|MySQL" {}
echo "\nChecking test implementations..."
rg "func Test.*Index" -A 5 --type go
Length of output: 1769
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the implementation details of processIndexes and MySQL processor
echo "Checking utils.go implementation..."
rg -A 10 "func processIndexes" database/schema/processors/utils.go
echo "\nChecking MySQL processor implementation..."
rg -A 10 "type MySQLProcessor" database/schema/processors/mysql.go
echo "\nChecking for any MySQL-specific structs or types..."
rg "type.*MySQL" --type go database/schema/processors/
Length of output: 856
database/schema/processors/sqlserver.go (4)
1-6: LGTM! Clean package declaration and imports.
10-12: LGTM! Constructor follows Go idioms.
The constructor is appropriately implemented for an empty struct.
14-16: Verify shared helper function and interface compliance.
While delegating to a shared helper is good practice, we should verify:
- The implementation of
processIndexeshelper - That this method signature matches the processor interface requirements
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the implementation and interface compliance
# Expected: Find helper implementation and interface definition
# Check processIndexes implementation
ast-grep --pattern 'func processIndexes($$$) []schema.Index {
$$$
}'
# Check interface definition
ast-grep --pattern 'type $_ interface {
$$$
ProcessIndexes($$$) []schema.Index
$$$
}'7-9: Verify consistency with other processor implementations.
Let's ensure the empty struct aligns with other database processor implementations.
✅ Verification successful
The previous script's pattern didn't correctly match struct definitions. Let me try again with a more specific pattern to find processor implementations.
Let me try another search to find processor interfaces and implementations since the previous search didn't give us what we need.
Let me try a different search pattern to find processor-related code.
Let me check the implementations of other processor structs to verify if they are also empty or have fields.
Empty struct is consistent with other processor implementations
The empty Sqlserver struct is consistent with the implementation pattern used by other database processors (Mysql, Postgres, and Sqlite). All processor structs are intentionally empty as they only need to implement the ProcessIndexes method, which utilizes the shared processIndexes utility function. The Postgres processor has an additional ProcessTypes method specific to its needs.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if other processor implementations have fields that should be included here
# Expected: Similar empty structs or identification of fields that should be added
# Search for other processor struct definitions
ast-grep --pattern 'type $_ struct {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 1095
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for processor struct definitions in the database/schema/processors directory
ast-grep --pattern 'type $_ struct {
$$$
}'
# Also search for any processor interface to understand required implementation
ast-grep --pattern 'type Processor interface {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 280006
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for processor interface and implementations
ast-grep --pattern 'type Processor interface {
$$$
}'
# Search for processor struct implementations
rg -l "type.*Processor.*struct" database/schema/processors/
Length of output: 119
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for all files in processors directory to understand the implementations
ls -la database/schema/processors/
# Search for processor-related code in these files
rg "type.*struct" database/schema/processors/
Length of output: 1042
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Get the content of all processor implementations
cat database/schema/processors/mysql.go
cat database/schema/processors/postgres.go
cat database/schema/processors/sqlite.go
cat database/schema/processors/sqlserver.go
Length of output: 2484
database/schema/processors/utils.go (1)
9-22: LGTM! Consider adding input validation and documentation.
The function implementation is clean and follows Go conventions. However, a few improvements could enhance its robustness and maintainability:
- Add input validation for empty or malformed column strings
- Add godoc comments describing the function's purpose and parameters
Here's a suggested improvement:
+// processIndexes converts database-specific index definitions to schema.Index structures.
+// It processes a slice of DBIndex, normalizing names and types to lowercase, and splitting
+// column definitions into separate strings.
func processIndexes(dbIndexes []DBIndex) []schema.Index {
var indexes []schema.Index
for _, dbIndex := range dbIndexes {
+ // Skip empty column definitions
+ if strings.TrimSpace(dbIndex.Columns) == "" {
+ continue
+ }
indexes = append(indexes, schema.Index{
Columns: strings.Split(dbIndex.Columns, ","),
Name: strings.ToLower(dbIndex.Name),Let's verify this utility function is consistently used across different database processors:
✅ Verification successful
Consistent usage verified, but SQLite has a custom implementation
The verification shows that processIndexes is used consistently in MySQL, PostgreSQL, and SQL Server processors, but SQLite has its own custom implementation. This is acceptable as SQLite might have specific index processing requirements.
- MySQL, PostgreSQL, and SQL Server directly use the shared
processIndexesfunction - SQLite implements its own
ProcessIndexeswith additional logic for primary key handling - The function has proper test coverage in
utils_test.go
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check usage of processIndexes across database processors
# Expected: Find calls in MySQL, Postgres, and potentially SQL Server processors
# Search for ProcessIndexes methods in database processors
ast-grep --pattern 'func ($x *$type) ProcessIndexes($_) $_ {
$$$
processIndexes($_)
$$$
}'
# Verify there are no duplicate index processing implementations
rg -g '*.go' -A 5 'func.*ProcessIndexes'
Length of output: 2385
database/schema/processors/utils_test.go (1)
11-11: LGTM! Appropriate function rename.
The rename from TestMysqlProcessIndexes to TestProcessIndexes better reflects the generic nature of the index processing functionality, which is now shared across different database implementations.
database/schema/processors/postgres.go (1)
15-15: LGTM! Verify shared implementation and test coverage.
The refactoring to use a shared processIndexes function improves code maintainability and follows DRY principles.
Let's verify the shared implementation and test coverage:
✅ Verification successful
The verification results show that:
- The shared
processIndexesimplementation inutils.gohandles basic index properties (name, type, columns, primary, unique) - Test coverage exists in
utils_test.gowith comprehensive test cases - The implementation is generic and doesn't contain any database-specific logic
Let's verify if there are any Postgres-specific index features that might need special handling:
The git history reveals that the previous Postgres-specific implementation was identical to the new shared implementation in utils.go, only performing case normalization for index names and types. Let's verify one final aspect - check if there are any Postgres-specific index types or configurations in the schema package that might need special handling:
Refactoring to shared implementation is safe and correct
The verification confirms that:
- The previous Postgres-specific implementation was identical to the new shared implementation, only performing case normalization
- The shared implementation in
utils.gomaintains all the required functionality - Test coverage is maintained through comprehensive test cases in
utils_test.go - No Postgres-specific index features or types were lost in the refactoring
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the shared implementation and test coverage
# Check the implementation of processIndexes
echo "Checking processIndexes implementation:"
rg -A 10 "func processIndexes" database/schema/processors/
# Verify test coverage
echo "Checking test coverage:"
rg -l "TestProcessIndexes" database/schema/processors/
rg -A 10 "TestProcessIndexes" database/schema/processors/
# Check for Postgres-specific index handling
echo "Checking for Postgres-specific index handling:"
rg -i "postgres.*index" database/schema/processors/
Length of output: 2196
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for Postgres-specific index features in the old implementation
echo "Checking git history for previous Postgres-specific implementation:"
git log -p database/schema/processors/postgres.go | rg -B 5 -A 10 "ProcessIndexes"
# Check if there are any Postgres-specific index types or features in tests
echo "Checking Postgres tests for specific index features:"
rg -A 5 "index|Index" database/schema/processors/postgres_test.go
Length of output: 1813
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check schema package for Postgres-specific index definitions
echo "Checking schema package for index types:"
rg -A 3 "type Index struct" database/schema/
# Check for any Postgres-specific constants or types
echo "Checking for Postgres index types:"
rg -i "postgres.*index.*type" database/schema/
Length of output: 265
database/schema/sqserver_schema_test.go (3)
3-10: LGTM: Clean import organization
The imports are well-organized, separating standard library imports from third-party and internal packages.
17-23: Verify Docker dependency skip logic
The test skips on Windows due to Docker dependencies, but this might need more context.
#!/bin/bash
# Check if there are any Docker-related files or configurations
fd -e dockerfile -e yml -e yaml | grep -i docker
# Check if other test files have similar Docker-related skip patterns
rg -l "Skip.*Docker" --type goConsider documenting the Docker requirements in the project's README or test documentation to help other contributors understand the test environment requirements.
25-27: Consider adding error handling in SetupTest
The NewSqlserverSchema call might need error handling or validation for the nil connection parameter.
database/schema/schema.go (2)
52-54: Implementation follows established patterns!
The SQL Server implementation follows the same consistent pattern used for other database drivers, maintaining code uniformity and predictability.
52-54: Verify SQL Server implementation dependencies
Let's verify the existence of the required SQL Server types and functions.
✅ Verification successful
Let me verify the implementation details of the SQL Server components to ensure they are properly defined.
SQL Server implementation dependencies are properly defined
The verification shows that all required SQL Server components are properly implemented:
- SQL Server grammar is defined in
database/schema/grammars/sqlserver.gowith necessary attributes - SQL Server schema is implemented in
database/schema/sqlserver_schema.gowith proper constructor and struct definition - Driver configuration is correctly set up in
contracts/database/config.go
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify SQL Server implementation dependencies
# Check for SQL Server grammar implementation
echo "Checking for SQL Server grammar implementation..."
rg -l "type Sqlserver struct" "database/schema/grammars"
# Check for SQL Server schema implementation
echo "Checking for SQL Server schema implementation..."
rg -l "func NewSqlserverSchema" "database/schema"
# Check for any SQL Server specific configuration
echo "Checking for SQL Server configuration handling..."
rg -A 5 "DriverSqlserver" "contracts/database"
Length of output: 819
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check SQL Server grammar implementation details
echo "Checking SQL Server grammar struct definition..."
rg -A 5 "type Sqlserver struct" "database/schema/grammars/sqlserver.go"
# Check SQL Server schema implementation details
echo "Checking SQL Server schema constructor..."
rg -A 5 "func NewSqlserverSchema" "database/schema/sqlserver_schema.go"
# Verify SQL Server schema type
echo "Checking SQL Server schema type..."
rg -A 5 "type SqlserverSchema struct" "database/schema/sqlserver_schema.go"
Length of output: 1053
database/schema/schema_test.go (2)
42-46: LGTM: SQL Server setup follows established patterns
The initialization of the SQL Server test environment and its integration into the driver map is implemented consistently with other database drivers.
Also applies to: 48-51
163-165: Verify SQL Server primary key index naming convention
While the implementation follows the pattern of other drivers, let's verify that "goravel_primaries_name_age_primary" follows SQL Server's standard naming convention for primary key indexes.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more specific information about how the primary key index name is constructed in the codebase.
Let me check one more aspect - how the primary key index is actually created in SQL Server by looking at the implementation.
Let me check one final aspect - the table creation for primaries and how the constraint is defined.
Based on the gathered information, I can now provide the final response:
SQL Server primary key index naming convention is correctly implemented
The implementation is correct because:
- SQL Server creates the primary key as a named constraint using
add constraint {name} primary key - The index name follows the pattern
{table}_{columns}_primarywhich is consistent with the framework's naming convention - The test verifies this naming pattern alongside other database-specific conventions (like Postgres's
_pkeyand MySQL'sprimary)
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check SQL Server's system tables for primary key index naming patterns
# This will help verify our assumption about the naming convention
# Search for any references to primary key index naming conventions in the codebase
rg -g '!*.{log,md,txt}' -i 'primary.*index.*name|index.*name.*primary'
# Search specifically in SQL Server-related files
rg -g '*sqlserver*' -i 'primary|index.*name'
Length of output: 2017
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for how the index name is constructed for primary keys
ast-grep --pattern 'func $_ ($_, $_) string {
$$$
primary key
$$$
}'
# Look for any index name generation logic
rg -B 5 -A 5 'getIndexName|indexName'
# Check the test file context around the assertion
rg -B 10 -A 10 'goravel_primaries_name_age_primary' database/schema/schema_test.go
Length of output: 875
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Look for primary key creation in SQL Server implementation
rg -B 10 -A 10 'constraint.*primary key' database/schema/grammars/sqlserver.go
# Check the test setup for the primary keys table
rg -B 10 -A 10 'CreateTable.*primaries' database/schema/
Length of output: 1128
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Find the table creation for primaries and its test setup
rg -l 'primaries' database/schema/
# Then check the content of relevant files
cat database/schema/schema_test.go | grep -A 20 -B 20 'func.*Primary'
Length of output: 1254
database/schema/grammars/sqlserver_test.go (1)
1-10: LGTM! Clean package structure and imports.
The package structure is well-organized with appropriate imports for testing and mocking.
database/schema/grammars/sqlserver.go (2)
111-119:
Adjust 'STRING_AGG' Usage for SQL Server Compatibility
The use of string_agg with within group (order by ...) is not compatible with SQL Server. In SQL Server, STRING_AGG does not support the WITHIN GROUP clause directly. Instead, ordering can be specified using the ORDER BY clause within an OVER clause.
Apply this diff to modify the SQL query for compatibility:
-"select idx.name as name, string_agg(col.name, ',') within group (order by idxcol.key_ordinal) as columns, "+
+"select idx.name as name, STRING_AGG(col.name, ',') WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY idxcol.key_ordinal) as columns, "+Alternatively, for SQL Server prior to version 2022, consider using a different approach:
-"select idx.name as name, string_agg(col.name, ',') within group (order by idxcol.key_ordinal) as columns, "+
+"select idx.name as name, STUFF((
+ SELECT ',' + col2.name
+ FROM sys.index_columns idxcol2
+ JOIN sys.columns col2 ON idxcol2.object_id = col2.object_id AND idxcol2.column_id = col2.column_id
+ WHERE idxcol2.object_id = idx.object_id AND idxcol2.index_id = idx.index_id
+ ORDER BY idxcol2.key_ordinal
+ FOR XML PATH(''), TYPE).value('.', 'NVARCHAR(MAX)'), 1, 1, '') as columns, "+This modification uses FOR XML PATH('') and STUFF to aggregate column names in a way compatible with older SQL Server versions.
Confirm the target SQL Server version supports the adjusted query.
3-6:
Ensure Compatibility with Go Version Regarding the 'slices' Package
The slices package is imported from the standard library, which is available starting from Go 1.21. Please ensure that the project is using Go 1.21 or later. If supporting earlier Go versions is necessary, consider importing slices from the golang.org/x/exp/slices module or implementing equivalent functionality.
Run the following script to check the Go version specified in the project's go.mod file:
✅ Verification successful
Go Version is Compatible with slices Package Usage
The project uses Go 1.22.7, which fully supports the standard library slices package (available since Go 1.21). No changes are needed.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the Go version specified in the project
# Expectation: The Go version should be 1.21 or higher
grep '^go [0-9]\+\.[0-9]\+' go.mod
Length of output: 46
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 7
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (21)
database/schema/processors/mysql.go (1)
14-16: Well-structured refactoring of index processingThe delegation to
processIndexesis a good architectural decision that:
- Promotes code reuse between different database processors
- Centralizes index processing logic
- Makes the codebase more maintainable
database/schema/processors/sqlserver.go (2)
7-9: Add documentation to clarify the struct's purposeConsider adding a documentation comment to explain that this struct is a processor implementation for SQL Server schema operations. This would help other developers understand its role in the larger architecture.
+// Sqlserver implements the database schema processor for Microsoft SQL Server. +// It works in conjunction with database/schema/grammars/sqlserver.go for +// SQL Server-specific schema operations. type Sqlserver struct { }
1-16: Consider future extensibility for SQL Server-specific featuresWhile the current implementation is clean and follows the established patterns, consider:
- Adding SQL Server-specific index processing logic if needed in the future
- Implementing version-specific handling for different SQL Server versions
- Adding support for SQL Server-specific schema features (e.g., filegroups, partitioning)
This will ensure the processor can handle SQL Server's unique capabilities while maintaining the current clean architecture.
database/schema/processors/utils.go (1)
13-13: Consider handling malformed column listsThe current implementation assumes well-formatted column lists. Consider handling cases where there might be empty entries after splitting.
Here's a suggested improvement:
- Columns: strings.Split(dbIndex.Columns, ","), + Columns: filterEmptyStrings(strings.Split(strings.TrimSpace(dbIndex.Columns), ",")),Add this helper function:
func filterEmptyStrings(ss []string) []string { result := make([]string, 0, len(ss)) for _, s := range ss { if trimmed := strings.TrimSpace(s); trimmed != "" { result = append(result, trimmed) } } return result }database/schema/processors/utils_test.go (2)
Line range hint
11-20: Test structure looks good, but consider adding more edge cases.The test setup is clean and well-organized. The test data effectively covers basic functionality with multiple columns and different index types.
Consider adding test cases for:
- Indexes with single column
- Special characters in index names
- Case sensitivity handling
- Invalid column lists
27-31: Consider explicit nil check assertion.While the current nil check works, consider using a more explicit assertion for better test readability.
-assert.Nil(t, result) +assert.Empty(t, result, "Expected empty result for empty input")database/schema/processors/postgres.go (1)
Line range hint
18-53: Consider documenting type mappings across different database systems.While implementing SQL Server support, it would be helpful to document how PostgreSQL types map to SQL Server types, especially for types that might not have direct equivalents (e.g., network address types, geometric types).
database/schema/sqserver_schema_test.go (2)
12-15: Consider a more concise field nameThe field name
sqlserverSchemacould be simplified to justschemasince the type already indicates it's for SQL Server. This would make the test code more concise while maintaining clarity.type SqlserverSchemaSuite struct { suite.Suite - sqlserverSchema *SqlserverSchema + schema *SqlserverSchema }
17-23: Improve documentation for Windows test skipThe comment explaining the Windows test skip is unclear and needs more context:
- Why are these tests skipped on Windows?
- What Docker dependencies are required?
- Is there a way to run these tests on Windows?
func TestSqlserverSchemaSuite(t *testing.T) { if env.IsWindows() { - t.Skip("Skip test that using Docker") + t.Skip("Skipping tests that require Docker (SQL Server container)") }database/schema/sqlserver_schema.go (4)
12-19: Add documentation for the SqlserverSchema struct.Consider adding a documentation comment explaining the purpose and responsibilities of this struct, following Go's documentation conventions.
+// SqlserverSchema implements schema operations for SQL Server databases. +// It provides SQL Server-specific implementations for table, view, and index management. type SqlserverSchema struct {
21-29: Add parameter validation in constructor.Consider adding validation for nil parameters to prevent potential panics during runtime.
func NewSqlserverSchema(grammar *grammars.Sqlserver, orm orm.Orm, prefix string) *SqlserverSchema { + if grammar == nil { + panic("grammar cannot be nil") + } + if orm == nil { + panic("orm cannot be nil") + } return &SqlserverSchema{
43-45: Document why DropAllTypes is not implemented.Add a comment explaining why this method returns nil and whether this is expected behavior for SQL Server.
+// DropAllTypes is a no-op for SQL Server as it doesn't support user-defined types +// in the same way as PostgreSQL. func (r *SqlserverSchema) DropAllTypes() error { return nil }
53-63: Add error documentation for GetIndexes method.Document the possible errors that can be returned by this method to help API consumers handle errors appropriately.
+// GetIndexes retrieves all indexes for the specified table. +// Returns an error if: +// - The database query fails +// - The table doesn't exist +// - There are permission issues func (r *SqlserverSchema) GetIndexes(table string) ([]contractsschema.Index, error) {database/schema/schema_test.go (1)
Line range hint
89-90: Consider implementing TODO tests for SQL ServerThere are TODO comments for
TestDropAllTypesandTestDropAllViews. Since SQL Server support is being added, these tests should be implemented to ensure comprehensive coverage.Would you like me to help implement these test cases or create GitHub issues to track them?
Also applies to: 93-94
database/schema/grammars/sqlserver.go (4)
43-45: Document unimplemented method 'CompileDropAllDomains'The method
CompileDropAllDomainscurrently returns an empty string. If SQL Server does not support domains or this functionality is not required, consider adding a comment to explain why it's unimplemented to improve maintainability.
61-63: Document unimplemented method 'CompileDropAllTypes'Similarly, the method
CompileDropAllTypesreturns an empty string. Adding a comment to indicate that this method is intentionally left unimplemented will help future developers understand the reason.
141-143: Document unimplemented method 'CompileTypes'The method
CompileTypesreturns an empty string. If there are no types to compile for SQL Server or this is pending implementation, please add a comment to clarify.
190-197: Consider using 'nvarchar(max)' as the default string typeThe
TypeStringmethod defaults tonvarchar(255)when no length is specified. Depending on your use case, you might want to usenvarchar(max)to allow for longer strings without specifying a length.Apply this change if appropriate:
func (r *Sqlserver) TypeString(column schema.ColumnDefinition) string { length := column.GetLength() if length > 0 { return fmt.Sprintf("nvarchar(%d)", length) } - return "nvarchar(255)" + return "nvarchar(max)" }database/schema/grammars/sqlserver_test.go (3)
95-98: Refactor duplicated setup code in testsThe
beforeEachfunctions in bothTestCompileForeign(lines 95-98) andTestCompileIndex(lines 142-145) contain identical setup code for initializingmockBlueprint. To enhance maintainability and adhere to the DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) principle, consider extracting this setup into the suite'sSetupTestmethod or a shared helper function.Also applies to: 142-145
153-160: Remove unsupportedAlgorithmparameter from index creationIn the
TestCompileIndextest case "with Algorithm", theAlgorithmfield is set to"btree":Algorithm: "btree",However, SQL Server does not support specifying an index algorithm like MySQL does. Including an
Algorithmparameter has no effect and may cause confusion. It's advisable to remove theAlgorithmparameter from the command to reflect the capabilities of SQL Server accurately.Apply this diff to remove the
Algorithmfield:-command: &contractsschema.Command{ - Index: "fk_users_role_id", - Columns: []string{"role_id", "user_id"}, - Algorithm: "btree", -}, +command: &contractsschema.Command{ + Index: "fk_users_role_id", + Columns: []string{"role_id", "user_id"}, +},
216-254: Clarify the test case descriptions inTestModifyDefaultThe test cases in the
TestModifyDefaultmethod are named "without change and default is nil" and "without change and default is not nil". However, the term "without change" might be misleading since the method under test is expected to modify the SQL based on the presence of a default value.Consider renaming the test cases to more accurately reflect their purpose, such as:
- "Default is nil: no modification to SQL"
- "Default is set: append default value to SQL"
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (12)
database/schema/grammars/sqlserver.go(1 hunks)database/schema/grammars/sqlserver_test.go(1 hunks)database/schema/processors/mysql.go(1 hunks)database/schema/processors/postgres.go(1 hunks)database/schema/processors/postgres_test.go(0 hunks)database/schema/processors/sqlserver.go(1 hunks)database/schema/processors/utils.go(1 hunks)database/schema/processors/utils_test.go(2 hunks)database/schema/schema.go(1 hunks)database/schema/schema_test.go(3 hunks)database/schema/sqlserver_schema.go(1 hunks)database/schema/sqserver_schema_test.go(1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- database/schema/processors/postgres_test.go
🔇 Additional comments (19)
database/schema/processors/mysql.go (1)
Line range hint 3-5: Clean import section approved
The removal of the unused strings import maintains code cleanliness while retaining only the necessary schema import.
database/schema/processors/sqlserver.go (3)
1-6: LGTM: Clean package structure and imports
The package declaration and import statement are well-organized and properly structured.
10-12: LGTM: Constructor follows Go conventions
The constructor is properly implemented following Go's naming conventions and patterns.
14-16: Verify the shared processIndexes implementation
The method correctly delegates to a shared utility function, but let's verify its implementation and test coverage.
✅ Verification successful
Let me check the implementation and test coverage of the processIndexes function to ensure it's properly implemented and tested.
Shared processIndexes implementation is properly implemented and tested
The shared utility function is well-implemented with:
- Correct transformation of database indexes to schema indexes
- Proper handling of column splitting, name/type normalization
- Test coverage for both valid indexes and empty input cases
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the existence and implementation of the shared processIndexes function
# Check for the processIndexes function implementation
echo "Checking for processIndexes implementation..."
rg -p "func processIndexes" database/schema/processors/
# Check for test coverage
echo "Checking for related tests..."
rg -p "TestProcessIndexes" database/schema/processors/
Length of output: 462
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Get the implementation of processIndexes
echo "Implementation of processIndexes:"
rg -p "func processIndexes" database/schema/processors/utils.go -A 15
# Get the test implementation
echo -e "\nTest implementation:"
rg -p "func TestProcessIndexes" database/schema/processors/utils_test.go -A 20
Length of output: 1305
database/schema/processors/utils.go (2)
1-8: LGTM!
The package declaration and imports are clean and well-organized.
9-22: Verify DBIndex type definition and usage
The function uses DBIndex type but its definition is not visible in this file. Let's verify its structure and ensure it's properly defined.
✅ Verification successful
DBIndex type is properly defined and used consistently
The DBIndex type is well-defined in database/schema/processors/model.go with all the required fields that are used in the processIndexes function:
type DBIndex struct {
Columns string
Name string
Primary bool
Type string
Unique bool
}The type is consistently used across different database implementations (MySQL, PostgreSQL, SQLite, SQLServer) and has corresponding test coverage.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for DBIndex type definition
echo "Searching for DBIndex type definition..."
ast-grep --pattern 'type DBIndex struct { $$$ }'
# Search for other usages of DBIndex
echo "Searching for DBIndex usages..."
rg "DBIndex" -A 5
Length of output: 6481
database/schema/processors/utils_test.go (2)
22-25: LGTM! Clear test execution and assertion.
The test execution is straightforward and the assertion properly validates both the structure and content of the processed indexes.
Line range hint 11-31: Verify test coverage across database drivers.
Since this is a shared utility function used by multiple database drivers, let's ensure consistent test coverage.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the verification results, I can now provide the final response:
Test coverage is appropriate and implementation is consistent
The verification shows that:
- The shared
processIndexesutility function inutils.gois well-tested with basic cases inutils_test.go - SQLite has additional specific test cases in
sqlite_test.gothat cover edge cases like multiple primary keys - All database drivers (MySQL, PostgreSQL, SQLite, SQLServer) consistently use the same utility function as seen in previous results
The test coverage is adequate because:
- Basic index processing is covered in
utils_test.go - Driver-specific behavior is covered in separate test files (e.g.,
sqlite_test.go) - Both normal and edge cases are tested (empty input, multiple indexes, primary keys)
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for similar test patterns across different database drivers
# Look for other test files in the processors directory
echo "Checking for related test files:"
fd -e go -e test.go . --exec grep -l "TestProcess"
# Check for usage of processIndexes function
echo "\nChecking for processIndexes usage:"
rg "processIndexes" -A 2 -B 2
# Look for other index-related tests
echo "\nChecking for other index-related tests:"
rg "Index.*Test" --type go
Length of output: 2107
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's verify the implementation and test coverage more thoroughly
# Check the implementation of processIndexes
echo "Checking processIndexes implementation:"
ast-grep --pattern 'func processIndexes($$$) {
$$$
}'
# Check test cases in utils_test.go
echo "\nChecking complete test file content:"
cat database/schema/processors/utils_test.go
# Check for any other index-related functions and their tests
echo "\nChecking for other index-related functions:"
rg "func.*Index" --type go -A 2
# Check if there are any other test files in processors
echo "\nChecking all test files in processors:"
fd test.go
Length of output: 30138
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the implementation of processIndexes and related test coverage
# Check the implementation of processIndexes
echo "Checking processIndexes implementation in utils.go:"
cat database/schema/processors/utils.go
# Check SQLite-specific test implementation
echo "\nChecking SQLite-specific test implementation:"
cat database/schema/processors/sqlite_test.go
# Check for any other processor-specific implementations
echo "\nChecking for other processor implementations:"
rg "type.*struct.*{}" database/schema/processors/ -A 1
Length of output: 2409
database/schema/processors/postgres.go (1)
15-15: Verify PostgreSQL-specific index features in shared implementation.
The refactoring to use a shared processIndexes function improves code maintainability. However, we should ensure that PostgreSQL-specific index features are properly handled.
Let's verify the implementation and test coverage:
✅ Verification successful
Based on the gathered information, I can now provide the final response:
The shared index processing implementation is safe and sufficient for PostgreSQL
The refactoring to use the shared processIndexes function is appropriate because:
- The implementation preserves all essential index properties (name, type, columns, primary, unique flags)
- PostgreSQL index processing doesn't require any special handling beyond these standard properties
- The conversion is straightforward: splitting column lists and normalizing names/types to lowercase
- Test coverage in
utils_test.goverifies the core functionality with both BTREE and HASH index types
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the shared processIndexes implementation and its test coverage
# Check the shared implementation for PostgreSQL-specific handling
echo "Checking processIndexes implementation..."
rg -A 10 "func processIndexes" database/schema/processors/
# Verify test coverage for PostgreSQL cases
echo "Checking test coverage..."
rg -A 10 "TestProcessIndexes.*Postgres" database/schema/processors/
Length of output: 1045
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's gather more comprehensive information about the index processing
# 1. Check the DBIndex struct definition to understand what fields are available
echo "Checking DBIndex struct definition..."
rg -A 10 "type DBIndex struct" database/schema/processors/
# 2. Look for any PostgreSQL-specific index handling in the postgres.go file
echo "Checking PostgreSQL-specific index handling..."
rg -A 10 "type PostgresProcessor|func.*Postgres" database/schema/processors/postgres.go
# 3. Check test files for PostgreSQL index tests
echo "Checking PostgreSQL test files..."
rg -A 10 "func Test.*Index.*|func TestPostgres.*" database/schema/processors/postgres_test.go
# 4. Check if there are any differences in how indexes are fetched for PostgreSQL
echo "Checking PostgreSQL index fetching..."
rg -A 10 "SELECT.*index" database/schema/processors/postgres.go
Length of output: 1793
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the utils.go implementation and its tests to verify coverage
# 1. Check the complete utils.go file for index processing
echo "Checking utils.go implementation..."
cat database/schema/processors/utils.go
# 2. Check the utils_test.go file for test cases
echo "Checking utils_test.go..."
cat database/schema/processors/utils_test.go
# 3. Check the schema.Index struct to understand the target format
echo "Checking schema.Index definition..."
rg "type Index struct" -A 10 database/schema/
Length of output: 1519
database/schema/sqserver_schema_test.go (2)
1-10: LGTM! Clean and well-organized imports
The package declaration and imports follow Go best practices and contain all necessary dependencies.
25-27: Review the test setup configuration
Several concerns with the current setup:
- Passing
nilas ORM seems suspicious - is this intentional? - The "goravel_" prefix is hardcoded - consider making it a suite constant or test parameter
- The setup lacks documentation explaining the configuration
+// Test constants
+const (
+ testPrefix = "goravel_"
+)
+
func (s *SqlserverSchemaSuite) SetupTest() {
- s.sqlserverSchema = NewSqlserverSchema(grammars.NewSqlserver("goravel_"), nil, "goravel_")
+ // Initialize schema with test configuration
+ // Note: ORM is nil for isolated schema tests
+ s.sqlserverSchema = NewSqlserverSchema(
+ grammars.NewSqlserver(testPrefix),
+ nil,
+ testPrefix,
+ )
}✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more context about the schema tests to understand if passing nil is a common pattern.
Let me check the schema implementation and test utilities to better understand the nil ORM pattern.
Let me check the actual usage of this test suite to understand the test patterns better.
Based on the gathered evidence, I can now provide the final response:
Test setup is appropriate for its purpose
The current setup is correct and follows the established patterns in the codebase:
- Passing
nilas ORM is intentional for these isolated schema tests that only verify schema parsing functionality (likeTestParseSchemaAndTable) - The "goravel_" prefix is consistently used across all schema tests (seen in MySQL, SQLite, and Postgres test setups)
- The test is focused and follows the same pattern as other schema grammar tests in the codebase
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if nil ORM is used in other schema tests
rg -l "NewSqlserverSchema.*nil" --type go
Length of output: 83
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check schema test patterns across different database types
rg "New.*Schema.*nil" -A 3 --type go
# Look for documentation or comments explaining test setup
rg "SetupTest.*Schema" -B 2 -A 5 --type go
Length of output: 903
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the schema implementation
ast-grep --pattern 'type SqlserverSchema struct { $$$ }'
# Check NewSqlserverSchema implementation
ast-grep --pattern 'func NewSqlserverSchema($_) { $$$ }'
# Look for test utilities
cat database/schema/test_utils.go
Length of output: 1583
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the test file content
cat database/schema/sqserver_schema_test.go
# Check if there are similar patterns in other schema tests
rg "func.*SetupTest" -B 2 -A 5 --type go database/schema/
Length of output: 6536
database/schema/sqlserver_schema.go (1)
1-79: Verify SQL Server version compatibility and features.
Please clarify the following aspects:
- Which SQL Server versions are supported by this implementation?
- Are there any version-specific features or limitations that should be documented?
- Does this implementation handle all SQL Server-specific index types (clustered, non-clustered, unique, etc.)?
database/schema/schema_test.go (3)
42-51: LGTM: SQL Server setup follows established patterns
The SQL Server setup follows the same pattern as other databases, with proper readiness checks and driver mapping.
198-199: Verify SQL Server default index type
The test expects the default index type to be "nonclustered". Let's verify this is the correct default type for SQL Server indexes.
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify SQL Server default index type
# Expected: Find documentation or implementation confirming "nonclustered" as default
# Search for SQL Server index type definitions
rg -g '*.go' -A 5 'CompileIndex.*sqlserver|sqlserver.*CompileIndex'
# Search for SQL Server index type tests
rg -g '*_test.go' -A 5 'nonclustered.*sqlserver|sqlserver.*nonclustered'163-165: Verify SQL Server primary key index naming convention
The test expects the primary key index name to be "goravel_primaries_name_age_primary". Let's verify this is the standard naming convention for SQL Server.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the code review, I can now generate a final response:
SQL Server primary key index naming convention is correctly implemented
The test expectation for SQL Server primary key index name "goravel_primaries_name_age_primary" follows the framework's established naming pattern:
- It uses the table prefix ("goravel_")
- Includes the table name ("primaries")
- Lists the primary key columns ("name_age")
- Ends with "_primary" suffix
This is consistent with how the framework handles index naming across different databases, as seen in the createIndexName method in blueprint.go, and is properly tested alongside other database-specific naming conventions (PostgreSQL: "pkey" suffix, MySQL: "primary").
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify SQL Server primary key index naming convention
# Expected: Find documentation or examples confirming the naming pattern
# Search for SQL Server index naming patterns in the codebase
rg -g '*.go' -A 5 'CompilePrimary|CreatePrimary'
# Search for other SQL Server primary key tests
rg -g '*_test.go' -A 5 'primary.*sqlserver|sqlserver.*primary'
Length of output: 144
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try different search patterns to find SQL Server index naming conventions
# Search for SQL Server specific schema or index code
rg -g '*.go' -B 5 -A 5 'DriverSqlserver.*index|index.*DriverSqlserver'
# Search for SQL Server index creation or schema code
rg -g '*.go' -B 5 -A 5 'sqlserver.*CreateIndex|CreateIndex.*sqlserver'
# Look for SQL Server schema tests
rg -g '*_test.go' 'DriverSqlserver.*schema|schema.*DriverSqlserver'
# Search for any SQL Server index related code
ast-grep --pattern 'if driver == database.DriverSqlserver {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 286
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's look at the schema test file and surrounding context
# Show the full schema test file
cat database/schema/schema_test.go
# Look for SQL Server specific code in schema related files
rg -g '*.go' -B 5 -A 5 'sqlserver' database/schema/
# Check for any index naming related code
rg -g '*.go' -B 5 -A 5 'IndexName|GetIndexName' database/
Length of output: 16613
database/schema/schema.go (1)
52-54: Consistent integration of SQL Server support
The initialization of sqlserverGrammar and driverSchema for the SQL Server driver is consistent with other supported drivers. The changes correctly integrate SQL Server support into the NewSchema function.
database/schema/grammars/sqlserver.go (2)
171-180: Review the logic for 'identity' and primary key in 'ModifyIncrement'
In the ModifyIncrement method, when a column is auto-incrementing and of a serial type, it adds identity if the blueprint has a "primary" command, otherwise it adds identity primary key. This seems counterintuitive; typically, the primary key constraint should be added when the "primary" command is present.
Ensure that the logic aligns with the intended behavior:
- If the column is auto-incrementing and should be the primary key, it should include
identity primary key. - If the primary key is defined elsewhere, perhaps only
identityis needed here.
3-5: Verify the use of the 'slices' package
The slices package is part of the Go standard library starting from Go 1.21. Ensure that your project is using Go 1.21 or later. If the project uses an earlier version, consider replacing slices.Contains with an alternative method, such as a custom function or github.com/google/go-cmp/cmp.
Run the following script to check the Go version specified in your go.mod file:
✅ Verification successful
The slices package usage is compatible with the project's Go version
The project uses Go 1.22.7, which fully supports the slices package introduced in Go 1.21. The import and usage of slices is appropriate and safe.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check the Go version specified in go.mod
grep '^go ' go.mod
Length of output: 30
database/schema/grammars/sqlserver_test.go (1)
279-289: Ensure default string length is appropriate in TypeString
In the TestTypeString method, when the column length is undefined or zero, the default length is set to 255:
mockColumn2.EXPECT().GetLength().Return(0).Once()
s.Equal("nvarchar(255)", s.grammar.TypeString(mockColumn2))Verify that this default length aligns with the expected behavior for your application and SQL Server's limitations. If a different default length is preferred, adjust the implementation of TypeString accordingly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
database/schema/utils.go (2)
9-28: Consider additional edge cases and input validationWhile the basic functionality is sound, consider these improvements:
- Add validation for whitespace in references
- Validate that table/schema names are not empty after trimming
- Consider adding SQL injection protection by validating schema/table name format
Here's a suggested improvement:
func parseSchemaAndTable(reference, defaultSchema string) (string, string, error) { - if reference == "" { + reference = strings.TrimSpace(reference) + if reference == "" { return "", "", errors.SchemaEmptyReferenceString } - parts := strings.Split(reference, ".") + const schemaSeparator = "." + parts := strings.Split(reference, schemaSeparator) if len(parts) > 2 { return "", "", errors.SchemaErrorReferenceFormat } schema := defaultSchema if len(parts) == 2 { - schema = parts[0] + schema = strings.TrimSpace(parts[0]) + if schema == "" { + return "", "", errors.SchemaErrorReferenceFormat + } parts = parts[1:] } - table := parts[0] + table = strings.TrimSpace(parts[0]) + if table == "" { + return "", "", errors.SchemaErrorReferenceFormat + } + + // Validate schema/table names against allowed pattern + if !isValidIdentifier(schema) || !isValidIdentifier(table) { + return "", "", errors.SchemaErrorReferenceFormat + } return schema, table, nil } + +// isValidIdentifier checks if the given string matches allowed SQL identifier pattern +func isValidIdentifier(s string) bool { + // Adjust pattern based on SQL Server identifier rules + // This is a basic example - adjust according to your specific needs + for _, r := range s { + if !unicode.IsLetter(r) && !unicode.IsDigit(r) && r != '_' { + return false + } + } + return true }
9-28: Consider adding documentationThe function would benefit from godoc-style documentation explaining:
- The expected format of the reference string
- The role of defaultSchema
- Examples of valid/invalid inputs
Add documentation like this:
+// parseSchemaAndTable parses a schema.table reference string into its components. +// The reference can be in the format "schema.table" or just "table". +// If only table is provided, defaultSchema is used. +// Returns schema name, table name and error if the format is invalid. +// Examples: +// parseSchemaAndTable("dbo.users", "public") returns ("dbo", "users", nil) +// parseSchemaAndTable("users", "public") returns ("public", "users", nil) func parseSchemaAndTable(reference, defaultSchema string) (string, string, error) {database/schema/utils_test.go (2)
11-22: Consider adding more test cases for better coverage.While the current test cases cover basic scenarios, consider adding:
- Schema-only reference case (e.g., "public.")
- Whitespace handling (e.g., " public . users ")
- Special characters in schema/table names
- Case sensitivity tests
Also, consider adding descriptive names to test cases for better readability.
Example enhancement:
tests := []struct { + name string reference string defaultSchema string expectedSchema string expectedTable string expectedError error }{ - {"public.users", "public", "public", "users", nil}, - {"users", "goravel", "goravel", "users", nil}, - {"", "", "", "", errors.SchemaEmptyReferenceString}, - {"public.users.extra", "", "", "", errors.SchemaErrorReferenceFormat}, + { + name: "valid schema and table", + reference: "public.users", + defaultSchema: "public", + expectedSchema: "public", + expectedTable: "users", + expectedError: nil, + }, + { + name: "table only with default schema", + reference: "users", + defaultSchema: "goravel", + expectedSchema: "goravel", + expectedTable: "users", + expectedError: nil, + }, + { + name: "empty reference", + reference: "", + defaultSchema: "", + expectedSchema: "", + expectedTable: "", + expectedError: errors.SchemaEmptyReferenceString, + }, + { + name: "invalid format with extra parts", + reference: "public.users.extra", + defaultSchema: "", + expectedSchema: "", + expectedTable: "", + expectedError: errors.SchemaErrorReferenceFormat, + }, + { + name: "schema only reference", + reference: "public.", + defaultSchema: "", + expectedSchema: "", + expectedTable: "", + expectedError: errors.SchemaErrorReferenceFormat, + }, + { + name: "whitespace in reference", + reference: " public . users ", + defaultSchema: "default", + expectedSchema: "public", + expectedTable: "users", + expectedError: nil, + }, }
24-30: Consider using subtests for better test organization.While the assertions are correct, using
t.Run()with subtests would provide better test isolation and clearer failure reporting.Example enhancement:
-for _, test := range tests { - schema, table, err := parseSchemaAndTable(test.reference, test.defaultSchema) - assert.Equal(t, test.expectedSchema, schema) - assert.Equal(t, test.expectedTable, table) - assert.Equal(t, test.expectedError, err) -} +for _, test := range tests { + t.Run(test.name, func(t *testing.T) { + schema, table, err := parseSchemaAndTable(test.reference, test.defaultSchema) + assert.Equal(t, test.expectedSchema, schema, "schema should match") + assert.Equal(t, test.expectedTable, table, "table should match") + assert.Equal(t, test.expectedError, err, "error should match") + }) +}database/schema/sqlite_schema.go (1)
51-66: LGTM! Good improvement in data consistency.The change to wrap the view operations in a transaction is a solid improvement. This ensures that all schema modifications (enabling writable schema, dropping views, disabling writable schema, and rebuilding) are executed atomically - either all succeed or none do.
Consider adding a comment explaining why these operations need to be atomic:
func (r *SqliteSchema) DropAllViews() error { + // Wrap operations in a transaction to ensure atomicity of schema modifications. + // This prevents partial modifications that could leave the schema in an inconsistent state. return r.orm.Transaction(func(tx orm.Query) error {database/schema/postgres_schema.go (1)
82-96: Good use of transactions for atomic type cleanup!The transaction wrapper ensures that both types and domains are dropped atomically, preventing partial cleanup scenarios. This is a robust approach that aligns with best practices for schema management.
Consider adding explicit logging for cleanup operations, especially in cases where large numbers of types/domains are being dropped, to aid in debugging and monitoring.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (8)
database/schema/mysql_schema.go(1 hunks)database/schema/postgres_schema.go(3 hunks)database/schema/postgres_schema_test.go(0 hunks)database/schema/sqlite_schema.go(1 hunks)database/schema/sqlserver_schema.go(1 hunks)database/schema/utils.go(1 hunks)database/schema/utils_test.go(1 hunks)errors/list.go(1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- database/schema/postgres_schema_test.go
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- database/schema/sqlserver_schema.go
🔇 Additional comments (8)
database/schema/utils.go (2)
1-8: LGTM! Clean and minimal imports
The package declaration and imports are appropriate for the functionality.
9-28: Verify usage across different SQL Server versions
Since this is part of the SQL Server driver implementation, we should verify the schema/table name parsing behavior across different SQL Server versions.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I can now provide a definitive response about the schema/table name parsing behavior across SQL Server versions:
Schema/table name parsing is consistent and version-independent
The parseSchemaAndTable function implements standard SQL Server schema/table name parsing that is consistent across all SQL Server versions:
- The implementation follows SQL Server's documented schema naming pattern of
[schema_name].[object_name] - The function correctly handles:
- Single-part names (table only) using the default schema
- Two-part names (schema.table)
- Validates against invalid formats with more than 2 parts
- The code is used uniformly across the codebase's SQL Server integration, with no version-specific branches or conditions
The implementation aligns with SQL Server's stable schema qualification rules that have remained consistent across versions. The schema parsing is a fundamental database feature that doesn't vary between SQL Server versions.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for SQL Server version specific code or configuration
rg -g '!{vendor,node_modules}/**' -l 'sql.*server.*version|sqlserver.*version'
# Look for any existing schema parsing implementations
ast-grep --pattern 'func $_(reference string, $$$) (string, string, error) {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 168
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for SQL Server related code and configurations
rg -g '!{vendor,node_modules}/**' -A 5 'sqlserver|mssql'
# Look for test cases related to schema parsing
rg -g '!{vendor,node_modules}/**' -A 10 'TestParseSchemaAndTable|test.*schema.*table'
# Search for any SQL connection or driver initialization code
rg -g '!{vendor,node_modules}/**' -A 5 'sql.Open\("sqlserver"\)|database/sql'
# Look for any schema-related error handling
rg -g '!{vendor,node_modules}/**' 'SchemaError|schema.*error'
Length of output: 34033
database/schema/utils_test.go (2)
1-8: LGTM! Clean and minimal imports.
The package declaration and imports are well-organized, containing only the necessary dependencies.
1-30: Verify the implementation of parseSchemaAndTable function.
Let's verify the implementation of the function being tested:
✅ Verification successful
Implementation of parseSchemaAndTable function is correct and well-tested
The implementation aligns perfectly with the test cases and handles all scenarios appropriately:
- Empty reference returns SchemaEmptyReferenceString error
- References with more than one dot return SchemaErrorReferenceFormat error
- Single part references use defaultSchema
- Two part references correctly split into schema and table
The function is used consistently across the codebase in postgres and sqlserver schema implementations.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find and verify the implementation of parseSchemaAndTable function
# Find the implementation
echo "Searching for parseSchemaAndTable implementation..."
ast-grep --pattern 'func parseSchemaAndTable($_, $_) ($_, $_, $_) {
$$$
}'
# Find usages of the function
echo "Searching for function usages..."
rg "parseSchemaAndTable\(" -A 2
Length of output: 1200
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the implementation of parseSchemaAndTable function
echo "Checking the implementation in utils.go..."
rg -A 15 "^func parseSchemaAndTable" database/schema/utils.go
# Let's also check the error types used
echo -e "\nChecking error definitions..."
rg "SchemaEmptyReferenceString|SchemaErrorReferenceFormat" --type go
Length of output: 1191
database/schema/postgres_schema.go (1)
124-128: Verify schema parsing edge cases
Good addition of error handling for schema/table parsing. However, let's verify the behavior of the parseSchemaAndTable function with various input formats.
✅ Verification successful
Let me check the test coverage and implementation details before making a final decision.
Schema parsing implementation and test coverage are comprehensive
The parseSchemaAndTable function is well-implemented with proper test coverage for all edge cases:
- Empty reference string
- Invalid format (too many dots)
- Default schema fallback
- Explicit schema.table format
The error handling in the reviewed code aligns perfectly with the implementation and test cases.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check parseSchemaAndTable usage and test coverage
# Look for test cases covering schema parsing
rg -l "parseSchemaAndTable.*test"
# Find all current usages to ensure consistent error handling
ast-grep --pattern 'parseSchemaAndTable($_, $_)'
Length of output: 421
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check test cases and implementation
cat database/schema/utils_test.go
cat database/schema/utils.go
Length of output: 1353
errors/list.go (2)
115-118: LGTM! Error definitions for schema operations are clear and consistent.
The schema operation error messages follow the established pattern and provide clear error contexts with appropriate format specifiers.
119-120: Verify consistent usage of new schema reference errors.
The new error messages for schema reference validation look good, but let's verify they're used consistently across the codebase.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the shell script results, I can now generate the final response:
Schema reference error handling is properly implemented and consistent
The new error constants are used appropriately in the codebase:
SchemaEmptyReferenceStringis used indatabase/schema/utils.gowhen validating empty referencesSchemaErrorReferenceFormatis used indatabase/schema/utils.gowhen validating reference format (too many dots)- Both errors are properly tested in
database/schema/utils_test.go - The only schema reference parsing is done in
parseSchemaAndTable()function, which correctly uses both error constants
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check usage of new schema reference error constants
# Search for usages of the new error constants
echo "Searching for SchemaEmptyReferenceString usage:"
rg "SchemaEmptyReferenceString" -B 2 -A 2
echo -e "\nSearching for SchemaErrorReferenceFormat usage:"
rg "SchemaErrorReferenceFormat" -B 2 -A 2
# Look for potential places where these errors should be used
echo -e "\nSearching for potential schema reference parsing:"
rg "parseSchema|ParseSchema|reference" --type go
Length of output: 6112
database/schema/mysql_schema.go (1)
39-57:
Potential issue with foreign key constraints within a transaction
Wrapping SET FOREIGN_KEY_CHECKS=0 and SET FOREIGN_KEY_CHECKS=1 within a transaction may not work as intended in MySQL. These commands modify session-level variables and are not confined to the transaction's scope. If the transaction is rolled back, foreign key checks might remain disabled, leading to unintended side effects on the database integrity.
Please verify that disabling and enabling foreign key constraints within a transaction behaves as expected. Consider moving the SET FOREIGN_KEY_CHECKS statements outside of the transaction to ensure they are executed regardless of the transaction's success or failure.
📑 Description
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Enhancements
Bug Fixes
Tests
✅ Checks