Skip to content

adapter: Disallow unmaterializable funcs in AS OF queries#34998

Open
ggevay wants to merge 1 commit intoMaterializeInc:mainfrom
ggevay:disallow-as_of-unmat
Open

adapter: Disallow unmaterializable funcs in AS OF queries#34998
ggevay wants to merge 1 commit intoMaterializeInc:mainfrom
ggevay:disallow-as_of-unmat

Conversation

@ggevay
Copy link
Contributor

@ggevay ggevay commented Feb 12, 2026

Fixes https://github.com/MaterializeInc/database-issues/issues/10004 by simply disallowing unmaterializable functions in AS OF queries.

Hopefully this is not a thing that users do today, but the PR adds a break glass feature flag that we can flip if it turns out that somebody wants to do this. We can remove the flag after one week in prod.

I think it's good to do this change rather sooner than later, before somebody actually starts doing such queries, at which point it would be more of a hassle to disallow it.

(Doesn't affect SUBSCRIBE; no unmaterializable function calls there anyways.)

@github-actions
Copy link

Pre-merge checklist

  • The PR title is descriptive and will make sense in the git log.
  • This PR has adequate test coverage / QA involvement has been duly considered. (trigger-ci for additional test/nightly runs)
  • If this PR includes major user-facing behavior changes, I have pinged the relevant PM to schedule a changelog post.
  • This PR has an associated up-to-date design doc, is a design doc (template), or is sufficiently small to not require a design.
  • If this PR evolves an existing $T ⇔ Proto$T mapping (possibly in a backwards-incompatible way), then it is tagged with a T-proto label.
  • If this PR will require changes to cloud orchestration or tests, there is a companion cloud PR to account for those changes that is tagged with the release-blocker label (example).

@ggevay ggevay force-pushed the disallow-as_of-unmat branch 2 times, most recently from 660e9d7 to 08e276c Compare February 16, 2026 17:11
@ggevay ggevay force-pushed the disallow-as_of-unmat branch from 08e276c to 5853c36 Compare February 16, 2026 17:12
@ggevay ggevay marked this pull request as ready for review February 16, 2026 19:52
@ggevay ggevay requested a review from a team as a code owner February 16, 2026 19:52
@ggevay ggevay requested review from mtabebe and teskje February 16, 2026 19:52
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant