Bugfix: GROUP BY/HAVING alias resolution

[systay]

trafficstars

Description

Related Issue(s)

Checklist

• [ ] "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported to release branches
• [ ] If this change is to be back-ported to previous releases, a justification is included in the PR description
• [ ] Tests were added or are not required
• [ ] Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on CI?
• [ ] Documentation was added or is not required

Deployment Notes

[vitess-bot[bot]]

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! :wave: Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

• [ ] Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
• [ ] Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

• [ ] Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

• [ ] Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
• [ ] New features should be documented.
• [ ] There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
• [ ] There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

• [ ] Is this flag really necessary?
• [ ] Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

• [ ] Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
• [ ] If the workflow needs to be marked as required, the maintainer team must be notified.

Backward compatibility

• [ ] Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
• [ ] Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
• [ ] RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
• [ ] If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from vitess-operator and arewefastyet, if used there.
• [ ] vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 88.25758% with 31 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 65.43%. Comparing base (696fe0e) to head (9eb1dc8). Report is 65 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
go/vt/vtgate/semantics/binder.go	86.04%	12 Missing :warning:
go/vt/vtgate/semantics/errors.go	33.33%	10 Missing :warning:
go/vt/vtgate/semantics/early_rewriter.go	95.68%	5 Missing :warning:
go/vt/vtgate/semantics/analyzer.go	85.71%	2 Missing :warning:
go/vt/vtgate/semantics/dependencies.go	66.66%	1 Missing :warning:
go/vt/vtgate/semantics/scoper.go	92.85%	1 Missing :warning:

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #15344      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.41%   65.43%   -1.98%     
==========================================
  Files        1560     1562       +2     
  Lines      192752   193863    +1111     
==========================================
- Hits       129952   126863    -3089     
- Misses      62800    67000    +4200     

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[systay]

does this mean we will start failing queries for group by/ having if the schema tracking is not enabled?

your comment was not connected to anything I could see, so I'm not sure what the question is about. Generally - if you are grouping by an alias introduced in the SELECT expression, and we have to do some or most of the aggregating on the vtgate, queries might start having issues if you are running without schema tracking