feat(query): Support rename dictionary ddl.

[Winnie-Hong0927]

I hereby agree to the terms of the CLA available at: https://docs.databend.com/dev/policies/cla/

Summary

We implement the logical plan and binder of rename dictionary, and we can call the interface of meta to rename dictionary.
We can execute Dictionary-related SQL statements like follows.
RENAME DICTIONARY [db0.]dict_A TO [db1.]dict_B;

• part of: Feature: Support rename dictionary #16752

Tests

• Unit Test
• Logic Test
• Benchmark Test
• No Test - Explain why

Type of change

• Bug Fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New Feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking Change (fix or feature that could cause existing functionality not to work as expected)
• Documentation Update
• Refactoring
• Performance Improvement
• Other (please describe):

---

This change is 

[drmingdrmer]

Reviewed 9 of 27 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 9 of 27 files reviewed, 6 unresolved discussions (waiting on @Winnie-Hong0927)

---

src/meta/app/src/app_error.rs line 902 at r1 (raw file):

#[derive(thiserror::Error, Debug, Clone, PartialEq, Eq)]
#[error("UnknownDictionary: `{dictionary_name}` while `{context}`")]
pub struct UnknownDictionary {

Define Unknown error with UnknownError: https://github.com/datafuselabs/databend/blob/af5fe4c3384b220555a282a0c2e33b564d75e43c/src/meta/app/src/tenant_key/errors.rs#L106

Refer to

https://github.com/datafuselabs/databend/blob/10d54aec1e67bdc88f0a4d5e67d0c88b579ec941/src/meta/app/src/app_error.rs#L1033

So does to the exists error.

---

src/meta/app/src/schema/dictionary.rs line 179 at r1 (raw file):

#[derive(Clone, Debug, PartialEq, Eq)]
pub struct RenameDictionaryReq {
    pub if_exists: bool,

remove this field if_exists. This field does not affect catalog or meta-service behavior, it just affect what to respond to the user. Move these logic to corresponding Binder or Interpreter level.

---

src/meta/app/src/schema/dictionary.rs line 181 at r1 (raw file):

    pub if_exists: bool,
    pub name_ident: DictionaryNameIdent,
    pub new_db_name: String,

DictionaryNameIdent does not include a db-name, the target db should be identified by database-id.

---

src/meta/app/src/schema/dictionary.rs line 219 at r1 (raw file):

/// The meta-service key for storing dictionary id history ever used by a dictionary name
#[derive(Clone, Debug, Eq, PartialEq, Hash)]
pub struct DictionaryIdHistoryIdent {

If Dictionary does not need to support undrop, remove this struct.

---

src/meta/app/src/schema/dictionary.rs line 231 at r1 (raw file):

#[derive(Clone, Debug, Default, Eq, PartialEq)]
pub struct DictionaryIdToName {

Why is this this identifier required? Is lookup dictionary name by id required?

---

src/query/service/src/interpreters/interpreter_dictionary_rename.rs line 66 at r1 (raw file):

                ),
                new_db_name: self.plan.new_database.clone(),
                new_dictionary_name: self.plan.new_dictionary.clone(),

The target should also be a DictionaryIdToName, instead of db-name plus a dictionary name.

Code quote:

                new_db_name: self.plan.new_database.clone(),
                new_dictionary_name: self.plan.new_dictionary.clone(),

[drmingdrmer]

Reviewed 8 of 27 files at r1, 10 of 14 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 27 of 31 files reviewed, 6 unresolved discussions (waiting on @b41sh and @Winnie-Hong0927)

---

src/meta/api/src/schema_api_impl.rs line 3055 at r2 (raw file):

                &req.name_ident,
                "rename_dictionary: src (db,dictionary)",
            )?;

use get_pb().ok_or_else() would be simple to handle these errors:

            let seq_meta = self.get_pb(&tbid).await?.ok_or_else(|| {
                AppError::UnknownTableId(UnknownTableId::new(req.table_id, "create_table_index"))
            })?;

https://github.com/datafuselabs/databend/blob/f8201da838d0df1ff00e2213361bdabe128156ef/src/meta/api/src/schema_api_impl.rs#L2447

Code quote:

            let (dict_id_seq, dict_id) = get_u64_value(self, &req.name_ident).await?;
            assert_dictionary_exist(
                dict_id_seq,
                &req.name_ident,
                "rename_dictionary: src (db,dictionary)",
            )?;

---

src/meta/api/src/schema_api_impl.rs line 3058 at r2 (raw file):

            let new_dict_id_seq = self.get_seq(&req.new_name_ident).await?;
            dict_has_to_not_exist(new_dict_id_seq, &req.new_name_ident, "rename_dictionary")?;

This client side assertion does not guarantee there is no such record when it is renamed inside meta-service.

You should have to add a condition to the following condition to assert the target record has a zero seq.

Code quote:

            let new_dict_id_seq = self.get_seq(&req.new_name_ident).await?;
            dict_has_to_not_exist(new_dict_id_seq, &req.new_name_ident, "rename_dictionary")?;

---

src/meta/api/src/schema_api_impl.rs line 3511 at r2 (raw file):

    name_ident: &DictionaryNameIdent,
    _ctx: impl Display,
) -> Result<(), KVAppError> {

This function should not return KVAppError, it should just return an ExistError.

---

src/meta/api/src/schema_api_test_suite.rs line 7503 at r2 (raw file):

                ..DatabaseMeta::default()
            },
        };

Use Util to simplify these env setup, refer to:

databend/src/meta/api/src/schema_api_test_suite.rs

Lines 1093 to 1104 in f8201da

	let mut util1 = Util::new(mt, tenant_name, db_name_1, "", "eng");
	let mut util2 = Util::new(mt, tenant_name, db_name_2, "", "eng");
	info!("--- create dropped db1 and db2; db2 is non-retainable");
	{
	util1.create_db().await?;
	util1.drop_db().await?;
	util2.create_db().await?;
	util2.drop_db().await?;
	info!("--- update db2's drop_on");

Code quote:

        let db1_name = "db1";
        let dict1_name = "dict1";
        let db2_name = "db2";
        let dict2_name = "dict2";

        let db1_req = CreateDatabaseReq {
            create_option: CreateOption::Create,
            name_ident: DatabaseNameIdent::new(&tenant, db1_name),
            meta: DatabaseMeta {
                engine: "".to_string(),
                ..DatabaseMeta::default()
            },
        };

---

src/meta/app/src/schema/dictionary.rs line 180 at r2 (raw file):

pub struct RenameDictionaryReq {
    pub name_ident: DictionaryNameIdent,
    pub new_name_ident: DictionaryNameIdent,

There should not be another DictionaryNameIdent, DictionaryNameIdent includes a tenant. But it does not allow to rename to a different tenant. the new_name_ident should be just DictionaryIdentity. Otherwise the SchemaApi has to check whether the two tenants are the same.

---

src/meta/app/src/schema/dictionary.rs line 220 at r2 (raw file):

#[derive(Clone, Debug, PartialEq, Eq)]
pub struct RenameDictionaryReply {}

If it is empty. Do not define this type.

[drmingdrmer]

Reviewed 2 of 4 files at r3, 13 of 15 files at r4, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 28 of 31 files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @b41sh and @Winnie-Hong0927)

---

src/meta/api/src/schema_api_impl.rs line 3058 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, drmingdrmer (张炎泼) wrote…

This client side assertion does not guarantee there is no such record when it is renamed inside meta-service.

You should have to add a condition to the following condition to assert the target record has a zero seq.

This is not updated yet. If you are going to keep this, please explain the purpose of it.

---

src/meta/api/src/util.rs line 407 at r4 (raw file):

}

pub fn assert_dictionary_exist(

Is this function used at all?

[drmingdrmer]

Nice shot, Thank you!

Reviewed 1 of 15 files at r4, 1 of 2 files at r5, 1 of 1 files at r6, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @b41sh and @Winnie-Hong0927)