SQL: Fix reserved vs non-reserved keywords - #667
Open
kbatuigas wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for rp-cloud ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
Contributor
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe SQL keyword documentation now uses Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~5 minutes Suggested reviewers: 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What
Corrects the reserved / non-reserved classification for Redpanda SQL keywords on the
xref:reference:sql/sql-statements/keywords.adoc[Keywords reference page], and fixes the
intro examples that the reclassification invalidated.
Resolves https://redpandadata.atlassian.net/browse/DOC-2269
Why
About half the keyword rows were marked with the wrong reserved/non-reserved status.
ENG verified the correct classification empirically against the
engine — looping every keyword through
CREATE TABLE tbl1 (<keyword> INTEGER); DROP TABLE tbl1;— and attached the corrected full table to the ticket. Docs that misreport which keywords
need quoting lead users to write queries y quote identifiers).
Changes
Table (`modules/reference/pages/sql/sql-s regenerated from the
reporter's corrected table and reconciled against his two diff lists:
CURRENT_ROLE/CURRENT_USERwere transposedNotescolumn — ad✓per rowIntro prose (was inconsistent with the corrected table):
SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE→SELECT, FROM, WHERE(
INSERTandUPDATEare now non-reseDB(not a keyword) →ACTION(a real non-reserved keyword)Verification
oxla-keywords.md.[cols]spec, header, and closing intact; no trailing whitespace.Review deadline:
Page previews
Checks