Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

privileges: fix create temporary tables privilege #29279

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Nov 1, 2021

Conversation

djshow832
Copy link
Contributor

@djshow832 djshow832 commented Oct 31, 2021

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #29271

Problem Summary:
In MySQL, creating a temporary table needs create temporary tables privilege on the database, and subsequent statements on the table require no privileges.

Not fixed issues:
#29280
#29281
#29282

What is changed and how it works?

After collecting the visitInfo, filter the temporary tables.

This doesn't need a release note because it's not documented yet.

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  • No code

Side effects

  • Performance regression: Consumes more CPU
  • Performance regression: Consumes more Memory
  • Breaking backward compatibility

Documentation

  • Affects user behaviors
  • Contains syntax changes
  • Contains variable changes
  • Contains experimental features
  • Changes MySQL compatibility

Release note

None

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Oct 31, 2021
@djshow832
Copy link
Contributor Author

I encountered an unstable test #29283 and try to run it again.

@djshow832
Copy link
Contributor Author

/run-check_dev_2

newVisitInfo.table = ""
privVisitInfo = append(privVisitInfo, newVisitInfo)
} else {
privVisitInfo = append(privVisitInfo, v)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we need needCheckTmpTablePriv here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@djshow832 djshow832 Oct 31, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think so. Any examples that there might be a bug here?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For example: create table t1 from select * from tmp . Tough we do not support this syntax currently, adding some checks here can avoid hidden problems in the future.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Addressed.

@@ -120,6 +121,68 @@ func CheckPrivilege(activeRoles []*auth.RoleIdentity, pm privilege.Manager, vs [
return nil
}

// VisitInfo4PrivCheck generates privilege check infos because privilege check of local temporary tables is different
// with normal tables. `CREATE` statement needs `CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE` privilege from the database, and subsequent
// statements do not need any privileges.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

CREATE statement needs CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE privilege from the database, and subsequent
// statements do not need any privileges.

Why not check it in the DDL operation?
If you add it as an additional check, it slow down all operations a bit which is unnecessary.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I know, but there are too many operations to check, not only DDL but also DML and others.
If I add all these checks in the planbuilder, it will be too dirty.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Besides, in planbuilder, I cannot add visitInfo but do not require privilege checks in a graceful way. visitInfo and privilege checks are bound together.

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

ti-chi-bot commented Nov 1, 2021

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

  • lcwangchao
  • tiancaiamao

To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling /cc @reviewer in the comment.
After your PR has acquired the required number of LGTMs, you can assign this pull request to the committer in the list by filling /assign @committer in the comment to help you merge this pull request.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review.
Reviewer can cancel approval by submitting a request changes review.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Nov 1, 2021
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. and removed status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. labels Nov 1, 2021
@lcwangchao
Copy link
Collaborator

/merge

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge.

Commit hash: c251b6b

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Nov 1, 2021
@djshow832
Copy link
Contributor Author

/run-check_dev_2

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot removed the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Nov 1, 2021
@djshow832
Copy link
Contributor Author

Another bug #29302 is just introduced after I submitted the PR, so I removed that test case until the bug is fixed.

@djshow832
Copy link
Contributor Author

/merge

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge.

Commit hash: 96a818a

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Nov 1, 2021
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

@djshow832: Your PR was out of date, I have automatically updated it for you.

At the same time I will also trigger all tests for you:

/run-all-tests

If the CI test fails, you just re-trigger the test that failed and the bot will merge the PR for you after the CI passes.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository.

@djshow832
Copy link
Contributor Author

/run-check_dev_2

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot merged commit 8d9647d into pingcap:master Nov 1, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Creating temporary tables should need CREATE TEMPORARY TABLES privilege instead of CREATE
4 participants