fix: atomic parser

[7ttp]

TL;DR

fixes SQL parser incorrectly treating function names containing "atomic" as BEGIN ATOMIC syntax

problem

saw multiple reports that:

The SQL parser treats any occurrence of "atomic" as BEGIN ATOMIC syntax,
even when it's part of a func somewhat like atomic_example()
which causes migrations to fail when a func with "atomic" in its name is followed by another statement

CREATEFUNCTIONatomic_example() RETURNS INTEGERAS $$ ... $$;
GRANT EXECUTE ON FUNCTION atomic_example() TO authenticated;
-- ERROR: cannot insert multiple commands into a prepared statement

sol

check that "atomic" is actually part of BEGIN ATOMIC syntax,
not just a substring in an identifier
parser now verifies that both BEGIN and ATOMIC are standalone keywords, not part of function names or other identifiers.

ref:

• closesSQL splitter matches 'atomic' too aggressively, triggering SQLSTATE 42601 #5062
• closesDatabase migration fails on local server when table or column name contains 'atomic' #4746
• closesStatement splitter misparses atomic in function names as BEGIN ATOMIC keyword #5020

Coverage Report for CI Build 24411795788

Warning

Build has drifted: This PR's base is out of sync with its target branch, so coverage data may include unrelated changes.
Quick fix: rebase this PR. Learn more →

Coverage decreased (-0.02%) to 63.751%

Details

• Coverage decreased (-0.02%) from the base build.
• Patch coverage: No coverable lines changed in this PR.
• 5 coverage regressions across 1 file.

Uncovered Changes

No uncovered changes found.

Coverage Regressions

5 previously-covered lines in 1 file lost coverage.

File	Lines Losing Coverage	Coverage
internal/utils/git.go	5	57.14%

---

Coverage Stats

Relevant Lines:	15363
Covered Lines:	9794
Line Coverage:	63.75%
Coverage Strength:	7.03 hits per line

---

💛 - Coveralls

Thank's for the fix !