fix: return error when killed query

[facetosea]

Description

Please briefly describe the code changes in this pull request.

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 @facetosea, 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 refines error handling and reporting across the client and shell components. It introduces more explicit error codes and logging for queries that are killed, enhances the specificity of error messages presented in the shell for interrupted operations, and resolves a display formatting issue for asynchronous retrieval failures. The changes aim to provide clearer, more accurate, and better-formatted feedback to users and developers regarding query states and errors.

Highlights

• Improved Killed Query Handling: The taos_fetch_row function now explicitly checks for killed queries, logs an informative message, and sets a specific error code (TSDB_CODE_TSC_QUERY_KILLED) before returning NULL, providing clearer feedback.
• Enhanced Error Reporting in Shell: The shell's shellRunSingleCommandImp function has been updated to use tstrerror(error_no) for interrupted queries, ensuring more precise and context-specific error messages are displayed to the user.
• Fixed Async Error Message Formatting: A formatting bug in the printf statement within shellDumpResultCallback for asynchronous retrieve failures has been corrected, ensuring error messages are displayed properly without malformed escape sequences.

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 fixes an issue where a killed query did not return a specific error code. The changes introduce TSDB_CODE_TSC_QUERY_KILLED and set it in taos_fetch_row when a query has been killed. This allows client applications, like the shell, to display a more informative error message. The changes in shellEngine.c correctly utilize this new error code. My review includes one suggestion to improve the robustness of the logic in clientMain.c.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 33.33333% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 62.29%. Comparing base (3d38933) to head (0339ad1).
⚠️ Report is 273 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
source/client/src/clientMain.c	50.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
tools/shell/src/shellEngine.c	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #33522       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   54.05%   62.29%    +8.24%     
===========================================
  Files         472      495       +23     
  Lines      294900   178606   -116294     
  Branches    99139        0    -99139     
===========================================
- Hits       159397   111266    -48131     
+ Misses      83784    67340    -16444     
+ Partials    51719        0    -51719     

Flag	Coverage Δ
TDengine	62.29% <33.33%> (+8.25%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.