parser: implement Restore for PrivElem, GrantStmt and RevokeStmt #198
Conversation
ast/misc.go
Outdated
| @@ -93,6 +93,18 @@ type AuthOption struct { | |||
| // TODO: support auth_plugin | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // Restore implements Node interface. | |||
| func (n *AuthOption) Restore(ctx *RestoreCtx) error { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Restore "IDENTIFIED WITH" will get "IDENTIFIED BY" ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And there is no test to cover AutoOption ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
-
According to
parser.y, it looks like syntaxIDENTIFIED WITH stringhas no effect:
Lines 7302 to 7319 in 63e2db7
-
To test
RestoreofAuthOption(andUserSpec,UserIdentity), and to follow the testing routine of other types, it should be promoted as aNodeand addAcceptfor it. Is that suitable?
|
LGTM |
|
PTAL @leoppro |
exialin
force-pushed
the
restore-priv
branch
from
2935269
to
97f22fc
Compare
| case ObjectTypeNone: | ||
| // do nothing | ||
| case ObjectTypeTable: | ||
| ctx.WriteKeyWord("TABLE ") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| ctx.WriteKeyWord("TABLE ") | |
| ctx.WriteKeyWord("TABLE") |
This also means line 1389 and 1447 would need to look like this 🤷♂️:
if n.ObjectType != ObjectTypeNone {
if err := n.ObjectType.Restore(ctx); err != nil {
return errors.Annotate(err, "An error occurred while restore RevokeStmt.ObjectType")
}
ctx.WritePlain(" ")
}There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, this is better. Should I create a new pull request to fix it? Sorry for the trouble.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@exialin Yes please. Thanks.
What problem does this PR solve?
Implement
RestoreforPrivElem,GrantStmtandRevokeStmt.Waiting for some helper
Restores implemented in #197 .Issue: pingcap/tidb#8532
Check List
Tests