COLLATION_CHARACTER_SET_APPLICABILITY.COLLATION_NAME vs MariaDB FULL_COLLATION_NAME

[rotdrop]

In recent MariaDB version the following will not succeed (resp. always yields an empty result set):

dbal/src/Schema/MySQLSchemaManager.php

Lines 463 to 474 in 7fb00fd

	$sql = <<<'SQL'
	SELECT t.TABLE_NAME,
	t.ENGINE,
	t.AUTO_INCREMENT,
	t.TABLE_COMMENT,
	t.CREATE_OPTIONS,
	t.TABLE_COLLATION,
	ccsa.CHARACTER_SET_NAME
	FROM information_schema.TABLES t
	INNER JOIN information_schema.COLLATION_CHARACTER_SET_APPLICABILITY ccsa
	ON ccsa.COLLATION_NAME = t.TABLE_COLLATION
	SQL;

The reason is, that CCSA.collation_name in recent MariaDB versions (tested version: 10.11.7) only contains the short collation name without prepended character set, while TABLES.table_collation contains the long table name. For example, in the case of the newly introduced utf8mb4_uca1400_ai_ci the corresponding row from COLLATION_CHARACTER_SET_APPLICABILITY is (CSV export):

"COLLATION_NAME","CHARACTER_SET_NAME","FULL_COLLATION_NAME","ID","IS_DEFAULT"
"uca1400_ai_ci","utf8mb4","utf8mb4_uca1400_ai_ci","2304",

while the TABLES.TABLE_COLLATION holds the full collation name utf8mb4_uca1400_ai_ci.

It also seems that this is a recent change in MariaDB; one Ubuntu "Jammy" system I am using runs MariaDB 10.6.16 which only has the COLLATION_NAME and CHARACTER_SET_NAME in that table, and the collation name is the full name with the character set prepended.

[derrabus]

Is this a bug report? If yes, please start with answering the usual questions:

• What did you try to do?
• What did you expect to happen?
• What happened instead?

[rotdrop]

This is a bug report related to the most recent versions of MariaDB

What did you try to do?

Running Doctrine/Orm migrations after upgrading to DBAL >= 3 and ORM >=2.20

What did you expect to happen?

That -- after applying the suggested migrations -- the schema validation tools would no longer complain

What happened instead?

Endless loop, applying the suggested migrations did not help.

One comment from my side: yes, you receive frequent bug reports, but please read and understand my explanations from the first post, IMHO they are clear and concise. Thank you.

[greg0ire]

but please read and understand my explanations from the first post, IMHO they are clear and concise

Another comment from my side: @derrabus 's questions are completely on point, it's not far fetched to ask you in what context you stumbled upon this, and it has nothing to do with the clarity or conciseness of your original message. I don't know why you assume your message hasn't been read.