maria-developers team mailing list archive

[jerome brauge <j.brauge@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Alexander,

Yes, it's your first assumption (works fine in Oracle (as a variable, or a label, or a table alias), but does not work in sql_mode=ORACLE)
I attached sql scripts used to do these tests (where every keyword are checked individually).
If you want, I can write the test script for the future patch according to the expected result.

Regards,
Jérôme.


> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Alexander Barkov [mailto:bar@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Envoyé : vendredi 10 mars 2017 12:01
> À : jerome brauge
> Cc : maria-developers
> Objet : Re: bb-10.2-compatibility
> 
> Hello Jerome,
> 
> Sorry for a late reply.
> I was fully busy with the CURSOR FOR LOOP related tasks.
> Now have time to catch time with my emails.
> 
> 
> On 03/03/2017 05:17 PM, jerome brauge wrote:
> > Hello Alexander,
> >
> > When I compiled some real procedures, I find some tables alias not
> supported by the current grammar.
> > Example :
> >   create table t1 (col1 int);
> >   select dec.* from t1 dec;
> >   select mod.* from t1 mod;
> >
> > I have done a complete test on Oracle and Mariadb with all keywords used
> as variables, table alias and goto/block labels.
> > You can find result in attached excel file.
> 
> Thank you very much.
> 
> Is my understanding correct: "TODO" in some cell means that this keyword
> works differently in Oracle vs MariaDB's sql_mode=ORACLE?
>
> That is:
> 
> - either works fine in Oracle (as a variable, or a label, or a table alias), but
> does not work in sql_mode=ORACLE
> - or, the other way around, it is not allowed in Oracle,
>   but is accepted by sql_mode=ORACLE?
> ?
> 
> 
> >
> > In addition, schema object names and qualifiers must complied with :
> >
> https://docs.oracle.com/cd/B28359_01/server.111/b28286/sql_elements008
> > .htm#SQLRF00223
> 
> I have created a task for this:
> 
> https://jira.mariadb.org/browse/MDEV-12224
> 
> The most tricky part is to implement regular vs quoted identifiers.
> 
> >
> > I tried to add these keywords in rules keyword_directly_assignable,
> keyword_sp_not_data_type and keyword_sp_data_type, but this generates
> too many conflicts.
> > I think that some refactoring of the grammar rules must be done, but I
> don't know how to do this.
> 
> Every keyword should be checked individually.
> 
> By the way, labels should be easy to fix, because they are surrounded by <<
> and >>, so they should not cause any conflicts at all.

> 
> 
> 
> >
> > Regards,
> > Jérôme.
> >

Attachment: keywords_label_mdb.sql
Description: keywords_label_mdb.sql

Attachment: keywords_var_mdb.sql
Description: keywords_var_mdb.sql

Attachment: keywords_alias_mdb.sql
Description: keywords_alias_mdb.sql

Attachment: keywords_alias_ora.sql
Description: keywords_alias_ora.sql

Attachment: keywords_var_ora.sql
Description: keywords_var_ora.sql

Attachment: keywords_label_ora.sql
Description: keywords_label_ora.sql