Delimit savepoint names as identifiers #23036
Conversation
roji
force-pushed
the
DelimitSavepointNames
branch
4 times, most recently
from
cd35fa7
to
ac6046c
Compare
| /// <param name="name"> The name of the savepoint to be created. </param> | ||
| /// <returns> An SQL string to create the savepoint. </returns> | ||
| public virtual string GenerateCreateSavepointStatement(string name) | ||
| => "SAVEPOINT " + DelimitIdentifier(name); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| => "SAVEPOINT " + DelimitIdentifier(name); | |
| => "SAVEPOINT " + DelimitIdentifier(name) + StatementTerminator; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(below and in SqlServer too)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will add, but is there a reason we need the semicolon? AFAIK it's always OK to drop it in a single-SQL statement, and if ever want to batch it we can say it's the batcher's responsibility (I think of the semicolon more as a batching statement delimiter than as a statement terminator).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Mostly just for consistency at this point...
And move savepoint management generation logic to ISqlGenerationHelper. Fixes #23021
roji
force-pushed
the
DelimitSavepointNames
branch
from
ac6046c
to
f1b19ef
Compare
|
Hello @roji! Because this pull request has the p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (
|
|
Apologies, while this PR appears ready to be merged, I've been configured to only merge when all checks have explicitly passed. The following integrations have not reported any progress on their checks and are blocking auto-merge:
These integrations are possibly never going to report a check, and unblocking auto-merge likely requires a human being to update my configuration to exempt these integrations from requiring a passing check. Give feedback on thisFrom the bot dev teamWe've tried to tune the bot such that it posts a comment like this only when auto-merge is blocked for exceptional, non-intuitive reasons. When the bot's auto-merge capability is properly configured, auto-merge should operate as you would intuitively expect and you should not see any spurious comments. Please reach out to us at fabricbotservices@microsoft.com to provide feedback if you believe you're seeing this comment appear spuriously. Please note that we usually are unable to update your bot configuration on your team's behalf, but we're happy to help you identify your bot admin. |
1 similar comment
|
Apologies, while this PR appears ready to be merged, I've been configured to only merge when all checks have explicitly passed. The following integrations have not reported any progress on their checks and are blocking auto-merge:
These integrations are possibly never going to report a check, and unblocking auto-merge likely requires a human being to update my configuration to exempt these integrations from requiring a passing check. Give feedback on thisFrom the bot dev teamWe've tried to tune the bot such that it posts a comment like this only when auto-merge is blocked for exceptional, non-intuitive reasons. When the bot's auto-merge capability is properly configured, auto-merge should operate as you would intuitively expect and you should not see any spurious comments. Please reach out to us at fabricbotservices@microsoft.com to provide feedback if you believe you're seeing this comment appear spuriously. Please note that we usually are unable to update your bot configuration on your team's behalf, but we're happy to help you identify your bot admin. |
ghost
merged commit 
And move savepoint management generation logic to ISqlGenerationHelper.
Fixes #23021
Note: some version of this can in theory be backported to fix 5.0, but it's complicated and probably not worth the risk.