fix: use correct parameter placeholders for Postgres GC queries

[omer-topal]

Fixes #2735

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Enhanced internal database query handling for improved PostgreSQL compatibility and system stability.

_{✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.}

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This fix addresses a PostgreSQL compatibility issue in garbage collection by replacing generic ? placeholders with PostgreSQL-specific $1, $2, ... placeholder format in two query-building functions and their corresponding test expectations.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
PostgreSQL Placeholder Format Fix for Garbage Collection internal/storage/postgres/utils/common.go, internal/storage/postgres/utils/common_test.go	Updated GenerateGCQuery and GenerateGCQueryForTenant to use squirrel.StatementBuilder.PlaceholderFormat(squirrel.Dollar) instead of generic squirrel.Delete(), replacing ? placeholders with PostgreSQL-compatible $1, $2, ... format. Test expectations updated to reflect the new placeholder style in generated DELETE queries.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~5 minutes

Poem

🐰 A dollar sign fixes the day,
Question marks fade away,
PostgreSQL's syntax now clean,
Garbage collection runs keen! ✨
Expired records take flight,
With placeholders done right! 💚

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and accurately summarizes the main change: replacing incorrect ? placeholders with PostgreSQL-compatible $1, $2... placeholders in GC queries.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	The code changes directly address the issue #2735 by replacing ? placeholders with PostgreSQL-style $1, $2... placeholders in GenerateGCQuery and GenerateGCQueryForTenant functions, fixing the syntax errors in DELETE statements.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	All changes are directly scoped to fixing the GC query placeholder issue with no unrelated modifications to other functionality or files outside the targeted scope.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing touches

• 📝 Generate docstrings

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 82.65%. Comparing base (6bec092) to head (bc4d35d).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2736      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.56%   82.65%   +0.09%     
==========================================
  Files          74       74              
  Lines        8125     8125              
==========================================
+ Hits         6708     6715       +7     
+ Misses        902      892      -10     
- Partials      515      518       +3     

☔ 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.