fix: use full DDL of flow in information_schema.flows.flow_definition

[sunng87]

I hereby agree to the terms of the GreptimeDB CLA.

Refer to a related PR or issue link (optional)

Fixes #7687

What's changed and what's your intention?

This patch builds full flow definition for information_schema.
It also update flake environment for recently introduced optional features.

PR Checklist

Please convert it to a draft if some of the following conditions are not met.

• I have written the necessary rustdoc comments.
• I have added the necessary unit tests and integration tests.
• This PR requires documentation updates.
• API changes are backward compatible.
• Schema or data changes are backward compatible.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @sunng87, 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 enhances the information_schema.flows table by providing a complete CREATE FLOW statement for the flow_definition column, offering a more comprehensive view of flow configurations. Additionally, it updates the flake environment to support new optional features, maintaining a consistent and up-to-date development environment.

Highlights

• Flow Definition: This PR modifies the information_schema.flows table to display the full CREATE FLOW DDL instead of just the raw SQL query in the flow_definition column.
• Flake Environment Update: The PR updates the flake environment to accommodate recently introduced optional features, ensuring compatibility and stability.

Activity

• The PR addresses issue The flow_definition from information_schema.flows is not complete #7687.
• The author, sunng87, has indicated that the necessary rustdoc comments and unit/integration tests have been added.
• The author has confirmed that API and schema/data changes are backward compatible.
• The PR includes updates to the flake environment for recently introduced optional features.

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 updates the information_schema.flows.flow_definition column to display the full CREATE FLOW DDL statement, which is a significant improvement for observability. The implementation correctly reconstructs the DDL in most cases. However, I've identified a potential issue where the sink table name is not fully qualified, which could lead to ambiguity. I've also suggested a minor refactoring for better code clarity. The accompanying updates to the Nix flake environment and test results are appropriate.

[fengys1996]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: c67be86886

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".