This reverts commit a1ee4a9f.

Even if a1ee4a9f is applied, CI is still flakiness.

https://buildkite.com/rails/rails/builds/61252#2c090afa-aa84-4a2b-8b81-9f09219222c6/994-1005
https://buildkite.com/rails/rails/builds/61252#2e55bf83-1bde-44a2-a4f1-b5c3f6820fb4/929-938

Failing tests by whether schema cache is filled or not, it actually
means that whether SCHEMA SQLs are executed or not is not target for the
tests.

So I've reverted commit a1ee4a9f which filling schema cache before
`assert_no_queries`, and replace `assert_no_queries` to
`assert_queries(0)`.

Almost all database statements methods except `explain` was moved into
`DatabaseStatements` at #35922. This moves the last one method.

Unfortunately, a11a8ff7 had no effect as long as using bind param, and
was not tested.

This ensures making the intent of a11a8ff7, which fall back to type
casting from the connection adapter.

Fixes #35205.

```
% ARCONN=postgresql bundle exec ruby -w -Itest test/cases/relation/where_test.rb -n test_type_casting_nested_joins
Using postgresql
Run options: -n test_type_casting_nested_joins --seed 55730

# Running:

E

Error:
ActiveRecord::WhereTest#test_type_casting_nested_joins:
ActiveRecord::StatementInvalid: PG::InvalidTextRepresentation: ERROR:  invalid input syntax for integer: "2-foo"

rails test test/cases/relation/where_test.rb:30

Finished in 0.245778s, 4.0687 runs/s, 0.0000 assertions/s.
1 runs, 0 assertions, 0 failures, 1 errors, 0 skips
```

Testing the result of `capture_sql` is fragile, it is due to whether
SCHEMA SQLs are executed or not depends on whether schema cache is
filled or not.

https://buildkite.com/rails/rails/builds/61248#a5b9dc59-ff0c-40c0-b56e-0895662fbc4c/993-1004
https://buildkite.com/rails/rails/builds/61248#1157b389-f2c7-4554-b6e5-a37624a0e74a/996-1005

I've confirmed all `capture_sql` use cases in our code base, all cases
won't expect SCHEMA SQLs are included.

```
% git grep -n capture_sql
test/cases/associations/belongs_to_associations_test.rb:202:    sql = capture_sql { comment.post }
test/cases/associations/belongs_to_associations_test.rb:204:    assert_not_equal sql, capture_sql { comment.post }
test/cases/associations/has_many_associations_test.rb:169:    sql = capture_sql { post.comments.to_a }
test/cases/associations/has_many_associations_test.rb:171:    assert_not_equal sql, capture_sql { post.comments.to_a }
test/cases/associations/has_many_associations_test.rb:276:    expected_sql = capture_sql { author.thinking_posts.delete_all }
test/cases/associations/has_many_associations_test.rb:281:    loaded_sql = capture_sql { author.thinking_posts.delete_all }
test/cases/associations/has_many_associations_test.rb:289:    expected_sql = capture_sql { author.posts.delete_all }
test/cases/associations/has_many_associations_test.rb:294:    loaded_sql = capture_sql { author.posts.delete_all }
test/cases/associations/left_outer_join_association_test.rb:22:      queries = capture_sql do
test/cases/associations/left_outer_join_association_test.rb:49:    queries = capture_sql { Author.left_outer_joins(:posts).to_a }
test/cases/associations/left_outer_join_association_test.rb:54:    queries = capture_sql { Author.joins(:posts).left_outer_joins(:posts).to_a }
test/cases/associations/left_outer_join_association_test.rb:60:    queries = capture_sql { Author.left_outer_joins({}).to_a }
test/cases/associations/left_outer_join_association_test.rb:65:    queries = capture_sql { Author.left_outer_joins([]).to_a }
test/cases/associations/left_outer_join_association_test.rb:78:    queries = capture_sql { Author.left_outer_joins(:essays).to_a }
test/cases/associations_test.rb:384:    log = capture_sql do
test/cases/associations_test.rb:399:    log = capture_sql do
test/cases/associations_test.rb:414:    log = capture_sql do
test/cases/associations_test.rb:429:    log = capture_sql do
test/cases/associations_test.rb:444:    log = capture_sql do
test/cases/associations_test.rb:459:    log = capture_sql do
test/cases/reflection_test.rb:307:    expected_sql = capture_sql { hotel.recipes.to_a }
test/cases/reflection_test.rb:312:    loaded_sql = capture_sql { hotel.recipes.to_a }
test/cases/relation_test.rb:212:      queries = capture_sql { Author.joins(:posts).merge(Post.joins(:comments)).to_a }
test/cases/relation_test.rb:232:      queries = capture_sql { Post.joins(:author, :categorizations).merge(Author.select(:id)).merge(categorizations_with_authors).to_a }
test/cases/relation_test.rb:347:      log = capture_sql do
test/cases/scoping/relation_scoping_test.rb:146:      log = capture_sql do
test/cases/scoping/relation_scoping_test.rb:159:    log = capture_sql do
test/cases/test_case.rb:33:    def capture_sql
test/cases/test_case.rb:41:      capture_sql { yield }
```

#36293 was an issue for through association with `joins` for a long
time, but since #35864 through association with `left_joins` would also
be affected by the issue.

Implicit through table joins should be appeared before user supplied
joins, otherwise loading through association with joins will cause a
statement invalid error.

Fixes #36293.

```
% ARCONN=postgresql bundle exec ruby -w -Itest test/cases/associations/has_many_through_associations_test
.rb -n test_through_association_with_joins
Using postgresql
Run options: -n test_through_association_with_joins --seed 7116

# Running:

E

Error:
HasManyThroughAssociationsTest#test_through_association_with_joins:
ActiveRecord::StatementInvalid: PG::UndefinedTable: ERROR:  missing FROM-clause entry for table "posts"
LINE 1: ... "comments_posts" ON "comments_posts"."post_id" = "posts"."i...
                                                             ^
: SELECT "comments".* FROM "comments" INNER JOIN "comments" "comments_posts" ON "comments_posts"."post_id" = "posts"."id" INNER JOIN "posts" ON "comments"."post_id" = "posts"."id" WHERE "posts"."author_id" = $1

rails test test/cases/associations/has_many_through_associations_test.rb:61

Finished in 0.388657s, 2.5730 runs/s, 0.0000 assertions/s.
1 runs, 0 assertions, 0 failures, 1 errors, 0 skips
```

Previously we would spawn one thread per connection pool, which ends up
being wasteful for apps with several connection pools.

Fixes #34456.

This partly reverts the effect of d1107f4d.

d1107f4d makes `touch` tracks the mutation whether the `touch` is
occurred by explicit or not.

Existing apps expects that the previous changes tracks only the changes
which is explicit action by users.

I'd revert the implicit `touch` mutation tracking since I'd not like to
break existing apps.

Fixes #36219.

Since d1a74c1e, Active Record requires
SQLite version 3.8.0 or greater, so savepoints and partial indexes are
always available.

That commit also added a runtime version check, so we can remove the
minimum version requirement from the internal adapter documentation.

This commit adds "TRANSACTION" to savepoint and commit, rollback statements
because none of savepoint statements were removed by #36153 since they are not "SCHEMA" statements.

Although, only savepoint statements can be labeled as "TRANSACTION"
I think all of transaction related method should add this label.

Follow up #36153

The initializer receives `nil` for these options when no cofigurations were given:
https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/v6.0.0.rc1/activerecord/lib/active_record/railtie.rb#L91-L97

Currently, `committed!`/`rolledback!` will only be attempted for the
first enrolled record in the transaction, that will cause some
problematic behaviors.

The first one problem, `clear_transaction_record_state` won't be called
even if the transaction is finalized except the first enrolled record.
This means that de-duplicated records in the transaction won't refer
latest state (e.g. won't happen rolling back record state).

The second one problem, the enrolled order is not always the same as the
order in which the actions actually happened, the first enrolled record
may succeed no actions (e.g. `destroy` has already succeeded on another
record during `before_destroy`), it will lose to fire any transactional
callbacks.

To avoid both problems, we should attempt `committed!`/`rolledback!` to
all enrolled records in the transaction.

with `ActiveRecord::BindParameterTest#test_too_many_binds`

sqlite adapter has its own `bind_params_length`, `ActiveRecord::BindParameterTest#test_too_many_binds` respects it.

* Modified `ActiveRecord::BindParameterTest#test_too_many_binds` to show `bind_params_length` value

```
$ git diff
diff --git a/activerecord/test/cases/bind_parameter_test.rb b/activerecord/test/cases/bind_parameter_test.rb
index 85685d1d00..83cd07f1d7 100644
--- a/activerecord/test/cases/bind_parameter_test.rb
+++ b/activerecord/test/cases/bind_parameter_test.rb
@@ -108,6 +108,7 @@ def test_statement_cache_with_sql_string_literal

       def test_too_many_binds
         bind_params_length = @connection.send(:bind_params_length)
+        p bind_params_length

         topics = Topic.where(id: (1 .. bind_params_length).to_a << 2**63)
         assert_equal Topic.count, topics.count
$
```

* Executed modified `ActiveRecord::BindParameterTest#test_too_many_binds`

```
$ bin/test test/cases/bind_parameter_test.rb -n test_too_many_binds
Using sqlite3
Run options: -n test_too_many_binds --seed 47321

999
.

Finished in 0.075249s, 13.2892 runs/s, 26.5784 assertions/s.
1 runs, 2 assertions, 0 failures, 0 errors, 0 skips
$
```

* Make scope arity check consistent

* Add test for arity change

[Rob Trame + Rafael Mendonça França]

Every database executes different type of sql statement to get metadata then `ActiveRecord::TestCase` ignores these database specific sql statements to make `assert_queries` or `assert_no_queries` work consistently.

Connection adapter already labels these statement by setting "SCHEMA" argument, this pull request makes use of "SCHEMA" argument to ignore metadata queries.

Here are the details of these changes:

* PostgresqlConnectionTest

Each of PostgresqlConnectionTest modified just executes corresponding methods

https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/fef174f5c524edacbcad846d68400e7fe114a15a/activerecord/lib/active_record/connection_adapters/postgresql/schema_statements.rb#L182-L195

```ruby
        # Returns the current database encoding format.
        def encoding
          query_value("SELECT pg_encoding_to_char(encoding) FROM pg_database WHERE datname = current_database()", "SCHEMA")
        end

        # Returns the current database collation.
        def collation
          query_value("SELECT datcollate FROM pg_database WHERE datname = current_database()", "SCHEMA")
        end

        # Returns the current database ctype.
        def ctype
          query_value("SELECT datctype FROM pg_database WHERE datname = current_database()", "SCHEMA")
        end
```

* BulkAlterTableMigrationsTest

mysql2 adapter executes `SHOW KEYS FROM ...` to see if there is an index already created as below. I think the main concerns of these tests are how each database adapter creates or drops indexes then ignoring  `SHOW KEYS FROM` statement makes sense.

https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/fef174f5c524edacbcad846d68400e7fe114a15a/activerecord/lib/active_record/connection_adapters/mysql/schema_statements.rb#L11

```ruby
          execute_and_free("SHOW KEYS FROM #{quote_table_name(table_name)}", "SCHEMA") do |result|
```

* Temporary change not included in this commit to show which statements executed

```diff
$ git diff
diff --git a/activerecord/test/cases/migration_test.rb b/activerecord/test/cases/migration_test.rb
index 8e8ed494d9..df05f9bd16 100644
--- a/activerecord/test/cases/migration_test.rb
+++ b/activerecord/test/cases/migration_test.rb
@@ -854,7 +854,7 @@ def test_adding_indexes

       classname = ActiveRecord::Base.connection.class.name[/[^:]*$/]
       expected_query_count = {
-        "Mysql2Adapter"     => 3, # Adding an index fires a query every time to check if an index already exists or not
+        "Mysql2Adapter"     => 1, # Adding an index fires a query every time to check if an index already exists or not
         "PostgreSQLAdapter" => 2,
       }.fetch(classname) {
         raise "need an expected query count for #{classname}"
@@ -886,7 +886,7 @@ def test_removing_index

       classname = ActiveRecord::Base.connection.class.name[/[^:]*$/]
       expected_query_count = {
-        "Mysql2Adapter"     => 3, # Adding an index fires a query every time to check if an index already exists or not
+        "Mysql2Adapter"     => 1, # Adding an index fires a query every time to check if an index already exists or not
         "PostgreSQLAdapter" => 2,
       }.fetch(classname) {
         raise "need an expected query count for #{classname}"
$
```

* Executed these modified tests

```ruby
$ ARCONN=mysql2 bin/test test/cases/migration_test.rb -n /index/
Using mysql2
Run options: -n /index/ --seed 8462

F

Failure:
BulkAlterTableMigrationsTest#test_adding_indexes [/home/yahonda/git/rails/activerecord/test/cases/migration_test.rb:863]:
3 instead of 1 queries were executed.
Queries:
SHOW KEYS FROM `delete_me`
SHOW KEYS FROM `delete_me`
ALTER TABLE `delete_me` ADD UNIQUE INDEX `awesome_username_index`  (`username`), ADD  INDEX `index_delete_me_on_name_and_age`  (`name`, `age`).
Expected: 1
  Actual: 3

bin/test test/cases/migration_test.rb:848

F

Failure:
BulkAlterTableMigrationsTest#test_removing_index [/home/yahonda/git/rails/activerecord/test/cases/migration_test.rb:895]:
3 instead of 1 queries were executed.
Queries:
SHOW KEYS FROM `delete_me`
SHOW KEYS FROM `delete_me`
ALTER TABLE `delete_me` DROP INDEX `index_delete_me_on_name`, ADD UNIQUE INDEX `new_name_index`  (`name`).
Expected: 1
  Actual: 3

bin/test test/cases/migration_test.rb:879

..

Finished in 0.379245s, 10.5473 runs/s, 7.9105 assertions/s.
4 runs, 3 assertions, 2 failures, 0 errors, 0 skips
$
```

* ActiveRecord::ConnectionAdapters::Savepoints

Left `self.ignored_sql` to ignore savepoint related statements because these SQL statements are not related "SCHEMA"

```
self.ignored_sql = [/^SAVEPOINT/, /^ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT/, /^RELEASE SAVEPOINT/]
```

https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/fef174f5c524edacbcad846d68400e7fe114a15a/activerecord/lib/active_record/connection_adapters/abstract/savepoints.rb#L10-L20

```ruby
      def create_savepoint(name = current_savepoint_name)
        execute("SAVEPOINT #{name}")
      end

      def exec_rollback_to_savepoint(name = current_savepoint_name)
        execute("ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT #{name}")
      end

      def release_savepoint(name = current_savepoint_name)
        execute("RELEASE SAVEPOINT #{name}")
      end
```

If the same id's records are saved and/or destroyed in the transaction,
commit callbackes will only run for the first enrolled record.

https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/a023e2180093ebc517a642aaf21f3c7241c67657/activerecord/lib/active_record/connection_adapters/abstract/transaction.rb#L115-L119

The regression #36132 is caused due to #35920 changed the enrollment
order that the first action's record will be enrolled to last in the
transaction.

We could not change the the enrollment order as long as someone depends
on the enrollment order.

Fixes #36132.

This fixes a regression for #35864.

Usually, stashed joins (mainly eager loading) are performed as LEFT
JOINs.
But the case of merging joins/left_joins of different class, that
(stashed) joins are performed as the same `join_type` as the parent
context for now.
Since #35864, both (joins/left_joins) stashed joins might be contained
in `joins_values`, so each stashed joins should maintain its own
`join_type` context.

Fixes #36103.

If we want to get alias resolved attribute finally, we can use
`attribute_alias` directly.

For that purpose, avoiding redundant `attribute_alias?` makes alias
attribute access 40% faster.

https://gist.github.com/kamipo/e427f080a27b46f50bc508fae3612a0e

Before (2c0729d8):

```
Warming up --------------------------------------
          user['id']   102.668k i/100ms
      user['new_id']    80.660k i/100ms
        user['name']    99.368k i/100ms
    user['new_name']    81.626k i/100ms
Calculating -------------------------------------
          user['id']      1.431M (± 4.0%) i/s -      7.187M in   5.031985s
      user['new_id']      1.042M (± 4.2%) i/s -      5.243M in   5.039858s
        user['name']      1.406M (± 5.6%) i/s -      7.055M in   5.036743s
    user['new_name']      1.074M (± 3.6%) i/s -      5.387M in   5.024152s
```

After (this change):

```
Warming up --------------------------------------
          user['id']   109.775k i/100ms
      user['new_id']   103.303k i/100ms
        user['name']   105.988k i/100ms
    user['new_name']    99.618k i/100ms
Calculating -------------------------------------
          user['id']      1.520M (± 6.7%) i/s -      7.574M in   5.011496s
      user['new_id']      1.485M (± 6.2%) i/s -      7.438M in   5.036252s
        user['name']      1.538M (± 5.4%) i/s -      7.737M in   5.049765s
    user['new_name']      1.516M (± 4.6%) i/s -      7.571M in   5.007293s
```

Follow up of #35838.

And also this refactors `in_clause_length` handling is entirely
integrated in Arel visitor.

* Avoid duplicated `@new_record` assignment
* Extract `define_attribute_methods` into `init_internals`

Follow up to b1458218.

Related 0ee96d13.

Those helper methods makes relation values access 15% slower.

https://gist.github.com/kamipo/e64439f7a206e1c5b5c69d92d982828e

Before (02b5b8cb):

```
Warming up --------------------------------------
        #limit_value   237.074k i/100ms
    #limit_value = 1   222.052k i/100ms
Calculating -------------------------------------
        #limit_value      6.477M (± 2.9%) i/s -     32.479M in   5.019475s
    #limit_value = 1      5.297M (± 4.3%) i/s -     26.424M in   4.999933s
```

After (this change):

```
Warming up --------------------------------------
        #limit_value   261.109k i/100ms
    #limit_value = 1   239.646k i/100ms
Calculating -------------------------------------
        #limit_value      7.412M (± 1.6%) i/s -     37.077M in   5.003345s
    #limit_value = 1      6.134M (± 1.0%) i/s -     30.675M in   5.000908s
```

I've realized that `user.id` is 20% slower than `user.name` in the
benchmark (https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/35987#issuecomment-483882480).

The reason that performance difference is that `self.class.primary_key`
method call is a bit slow.

Avoiding that method call will make almost attribute access faster and
`user.id` will be completely the same performance with `user.name`.

Before (02b5b8cb):

```
Warming up --------------------------------------
             user.id   140.535k i/100ms
          user['id']    96.549k i/100ms
           user.name   158.110k i/100ms
        user['name']    94.507k i/100ms
       user.changed?    19.003k i/100ms
 user.saved_changes?    25.404k i/100ms
Calculating -------------------------------------
             user.id      2.231M (± 0.9%) i/s -     11.243M in   5.040066s
          user['id']      1.310M (± 1.3%) i/s -      6.565M in   5.012607s
           user.name      2.683M (± 1.2%) i/s -     13.439M in   5.009392s
        user['name']      1.322M (± 0.9%) i/s -      6.615M in   5.003239s
       user.changed?    201.999k (±10.9%) i/s -      1.007M in   5.091195s
 user.saved_changes?    258.214k (±17.1%) i/s -      1.245M in   5.007421s
```

After (this change):

```
Warming up --------------------------------------
             user.id   158.364k i/100ms
          user['id']   106.412k i/100ms
           user.name   158.644k i/100ms
        user['name']   107.518k i/100ms
       user.changed?    19.082k i/100ms
 user.saved_changes?    24.886k i/100ms
Calculating -------------------------------------
             user.id      2.768M (± 1.1%) i/s -     13.936M in   5.034957s
          user['id']      1.507M (± 2.1%) i/s -      7.555M in   5.017211s
           user.name      2.727M (± 1.5%) i/s -     13.643M in   5.004766s
        user['name']      1.521M (± 1.3%) i/s -      7.634M in   5.018321s
       user.changed?    200.865k (±11.1%) i/s -    992.264k in   5.044868s
 user.saved_changes?    269.652k (±10.5%) i/s -      1.344M in   5.077972s
```

It was never used from the beginning.

Method call in Ruby is a bit slow.

This makes attribute access 10% faster by avoiding method call
(`sync_with_transaction_state`).

Before (96cf7e0e):

```
Warming up --------------------------------------
             user.id   131.291k i/100ms
          user['id']    91.786k i/100ms
           user.name   151.605k i/100ms
        user['name']    92.664k i/100ms
       user.changed?    17.772k i/100ms
 user.saved_changes?    23.909k i/100ms
Calculating -------------------------------------
             user.id      1.988M (± 7.0%) i/s -      9.978M in   5.051474s
          user['id']      1.155M (± 5.8%) i/s -      5.783M in   5.022672s
           user.name      2.450M (± 4.3%) i/s -     12.280M in   5.021234s
        user['name']      1.263M (± 2.1%) i/s -      6.394M in   5.066638s
       user.changed?    175.070k (±13.3%) i/s -    853.056k in   5.011555s
 user.saved_changes?    259.114k (±11.8%) i/s -      1.267M in   5.001260s
```

After (this change):

```
Warming up --------------------------------------
             user.id   137.625k i/100ms
          user['id']    96.054k i/100ms
           user.name   156.379k i/100ms
        user['name']    94.795k i/100ms
       user.changed?    18.172k i/100ms
 user.saved_changes?    24.337k i/100ms
Calculating -------------------------------------
             user.id      2.201M (± 0.5%) i/s -     11.010M in   5.002955s
          user['id']      1.320M (± 1.0%) i/s -      6.628M in   5.021293s
           user.name      2.677M (± 1.6%) i/s -     13.449M in   5.024399s
        user['name']      1.314M (± 1.8%) i/s -      6.636M in   5.051444s
       user.changed?    190.588k (±11.1%) i/s -    944.944k in   5.065848s
 user.saved_changes?    262.782k (±12.1%) i/s -      1.290M in   5.028080s
```

This was accidentally left in, the standard `db:migrate:up` doesn't have
a description so `db:migrate:up:namespace` shouldn't have one either.