fix:refactor stmt2 bind tbname

[Pengrongkun]

fix stmt2 tbname copy length

refactor stmt2 bind tbname

Uncomment stmt2Test

fix CI

Optimize the tb/db name error message

Description

Issue(s)

• Close/close/Fix/fix/Resolve/resolve: Issue Link

Checklist

Please check the items in the checklist if applicable.

• Is the user manual updated?
• Are the test cases passed and automated?
• Is there no significant decrease in test coverage?

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @Pengrongkun, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request refactors the statement (stmt2) binding mechanism, primarily focusing on how table and database names are handled. It addresses issues related to the length of copied table names, introduces a new constant for quoting, and significantly improves the clarity and specificity of error messages when invalid or excessively long database/table names are provided. Additionally, it streamlines thread management in interlace mode and introduces new tests to validate these boundary conditions.

Highlights

• Refactored stmt2 Table Name Binding: The logic for binding table names in stmt2 has been refactored to ensure accurate copying and processing, especially concerning name lengths and quoted identifiers.
• Enhanced Name Length Validation: Improved validation for database and table name lengths, including accounting for quotes, with more precise error messages.
• Consolidated Thread Cleanup: The thread cleanup logic for stmt2 in interlace mode has been moved and made conditional, streamlining resource management.
• New Boundary Tests: Comprehensive system tests were added to verify the handling of database and table names at their length boundaries, ensuring robust error reporting.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request effectively refactors the table name binding logic for prepared statements, improving correctness and robustness. The changes centralize name parsing, fix potential buffer size issues, and enhance error messaging for name length violations. The addition of comprehensive boundary tests for table and database names is a great improvement. I've found one potential issue in the database name length validation logic that should be addressed.

[gemini-code-assist]

There appears to be a logic error in this length check. dbLen is being compared against TSDB_DB_FNAME_LEN, which represents the length for the full filename of a database, not the logical database name length. For consistency with the table name checks in this same function and for correctness, this should be TSDB_DB_NAME_LEN.

    if (dbLen >= TSDB_DB_NAME_LEN + TSDB_NAME_QUOTE) {
      return generateSyntaxErrMsg(pMsgBuf, TSDB_CODE_PAR_INVALID_IDENTIFIER_NAME, msg5);
    }