Apparently in a general case a short-cut for the distinct optimization
is invalid if join buffers are used to join tables after the tables whose
values are to selected.
Other fix of maybe_null problem and revert of revno: 3608 "MDEV-3873 & MDEV-3876 & MDEV-3912 : Wrong result (extra rows) with ALL subquery from a MERGE view."
When a non-nullable datetime field is used under an IS NULL predicate
of the WHERE condition in a query with outer joins the remove_eq_conds
function should check whether this field belongs to an inner table
of any outer join that can be, in a general case, a nested outer join.
When in function remove_eq_conds() a sub-formula of the processed condition
is replaced for another formula we should ensure that in the resulting
formula AND/OR levels must alternate.
The patch to fix mdev-4418 turned out to be incorrect.
At the substitution of single row tables in make_join_statistics()
the used multiple equalities may change and references to the new multiple
equalities must be updated. The function remove_eq_conds() takes care of it and
it should be called right after the substitution of single row tables.
Calling it after the call of make_join_statistics was a mistake.
After single row substitutions there might appear new equalities.
They should be properly propagated to all AND/OR levels the WHERE
condition. It's done now with an additional call of remove_eq_conds().
This patch almost totally revised the patch for bug mdev-4177.
The latter had too many defects. In particular, it did not
propagate multiple equalities formed when merging a degenerate
disjunct into underlying AND formula.
This a an old legacy performance bug.
When a very selective range scan existed for the second table in a join,
and, at the same time, there was another range condition depending on the
fields of the first table, the optimizer chose a plan with
'Range checked for each record'. This plan was extremely inefficient in
comparison with the regular selective range scan.
As a matter of fact the range scan chosen for each record was the same as
that selective range scan.
Changed the test case for bug 24776 to preserve the old output for explain.
MDEV-4643 MariaDB crashes consistently when trying a SELECT on VIEW with a UNION and an additional JOIN in SELECT
open derived temp tables *before* trying QUICK_SELECT for them,
handler::multi_range_read_info() needs an open table.
This could happen when using Aria for internal temporary files (default case) and using DISTINCT.
_ma_scan_restore_block_record() didn't work correctly if there was rows inserted, updated or deleted on the handler
between calls to _ma_scan_remember_block_record() and _ma_scan_restore_block_record().
The effect was that some DISTINCT queries that used remove_dup_with_compare() could fail.
.bzrignore:
Ignore sql_yacc.hh
mysql-test/suite/maria/r/distinct.result:
Test case for MDEV-4280
mysql-test/suite/maria/t/distinct.test:
Test case for MDEV-4280
mysql-test/t/mysql.test:
Fixed test suite (we could get error -1 in some cases)
sql/sql_select.cc:
Break loop if restart_rnd_next() gives an error
storage/maria/ha_maria.cc:
scan_restore_pos() can return disk fault error.
storage/maria/ma_blockrec.c:
_ma_scan_remember_block_record() did incorrectly update scan.dir instead of scan_save.dir .
_ma_scan_restore_block_record() didn't work correctly if there was rows inserted,updated or deleted on the handler
between calls to _ma_scan_remember_block_record() and _ma_scan_restore_block_record().
Fixed by adding counters for row changes and reading the current scan page if changes had been made.
storage/maria/ma_blockrec.h:
scan_restore_pos() can return disk fault error.
storage/maria/ma_delete.c:
Increment row_changes
storage/maria/ma_scan.c:
scan_restore_pos() can return disk fault error.
storage/maria/ma_update.c:
Increment row_changes
storage/maria/ma_write.c:
Increment row_changes
storage/maria/maria_def.h:
scan_restore_pos() can return disk fault error.
When iterating over a list of conditions using List_iterator
the function remove_eq_conds should skip all predicates that
replace a condition from the list. Otherwise it can come to
an infinite recursion.
<non-nullable datatime field> IS NULL in outer joins with
that in inner joins.
Previously such condition was transformed into the condition
<non-nullable datatime field> = 0 unless the field belonged
to an inner table of an outer join. In this case the predicate
was interpreted as for any other field.
Now if the field in the predicate <non-nullable datatime field> IS NULL
belongs to an inner table of an outer join the predicate is
transformed into the disjunction
<non-nullable datatime field> = 0 OR <non-nullable datatime field> IS NULL.
This is fully compatible with the semantics of such predicates in 5.5.
This bug was the result of incompleteness of the patch for bug mdev-4177.
When an OR condition is simplified to a single conjunct it is merged
into the embedding AND condition. Multiple equalities are also merged,
and any field item involved in those equality should acquire a pointer
to a the multiple equality formed by this merge.
fulltext search was initialized for all MATCH ... AGAINST items
at the end of the JOIN::optimize(). But since 5.3 derived tables
are initialized lazily on first use, very late in the sub_select().
Skip Item_func_match::init_search initialization if the corresponding
table isn't open yet; repeat fulltext initialization for all
not-yet-initialized MATCH ... AGAINST items after creating derived tables.
In some cases, when using views the optimizer incorrectly determined
possible join orders for queries with nested outer and inner joins.
This could lead to invalid execution plans for such queries.
This is a bug in the legacy code. It did not manifest itself because
it was masked by other bugs that were fixed by the patches for
mdev-4172 and mdev-4177.
Do not include BLOB fields into the key to access the temporary
table created for a materialized view/derived table.
BLOB components are not allowed in keys.
The function remove_eq_cond removes the parts of a disjunction
for which it has been proved that they are always true. In the
result of this removal the disjunction may be converted into a
formula without OR that must be merged into the the AND formula
that contains the disjunction.
The merging of two AND conditions must take into account the
multiple equalities that may be part of each of them.
These multiple equality must be merged and become part of the
and object built as the result of the merge of the AND conditions.
Erroneously the function remove_eq_cond lacked the code that
would merge multiple equalities of the merged AND conditions.
This could lead to confusing situations when at the same AND
level there were two multiple equalities with common members
and the list of equal items contained only some of these
multiple equalities.
This, in its turn, could lead to an incorrect work of the
function substitute_for_best_equal_field when it tried to optimize
ref accesses. This resulted in forming invalid TABLE_REF objects
that were used to build look-up keys when materialized subqueries
were exploited.
This bug in the legacy code could manifest itself in queries with
semi-join materialized subqueries.
When a subquery is materialized all conditions that are imposed
only on the columns belonging to the tables from the subquery
are taken into account.The code responsible for subquery optimizations
that employes subquery materialization makes sure to remove these
conditions from the WHERE conditions of the query obtained after
it has transformed the original query into a query with a semi-join.
If the condition to be removed is an equality condition it could
be added to ON expressions and/or conditions from disjunctive branches
(parts of OR conditions) in an attempt to generate better access keys
to the tables of the query. Such equalities are supposed to be removed
later from all the formulas where they have been added to.
However, erroneously, this was not done in some cases when an ON
expression and/or a disjunctive part of the OR condition could
be converted into one multiple equality. As a result some equality
predicates over columns belonging to the tables of the materialized
subquery remained in the ON condition and/or the a disjunctive
part of the OR condition, and the excuter later, when trying to
evaluate them, returned wrong answers as the values of the fields
from these equalities were not valid.
This happened because any standalone multiple equality (a multiple
equality that are not ANDed with any other predicates) lacked
the information about equality predicates inherited from upper
levels (in particular, inherited from the WHERE condition).
The fix adds a reference to such information to any standalone
multiple equality.
The wrong result set returned by the left join query from
the bug test case happened due to several inconsistencies
and bugs of the legacy mysql code.
The bug test case uses an execution plan that employs a scan
of a materialized IN subquery from the WHERE condition.
When materializing such an IN- subquery the optimizer injects
additional equalities into the WHERE clause. These equalities
express the constraints imposed by the subquery predicate.
The injected equality of the query in the test case happens
to belong to the same equality class, and a new equality
imposing a condition on the rows of the materialized subquery
is inferred from this class. Simultaneously the multiple
equality is added to the ON expression of the LEFT JOIN
used in the main query.
The inferred equality of the form f1=f2 is taken into account
when optimizing the scan of the rows the temporary table
that is the result of the subquery materialization: only the
values of the field f1 are read from the table into the record
buffer. Meanwhile the inferred equality is removed from the
WHERE conditions altogether as a constraint on the fields
of the temporary table that has been used when filling this table.
This equality is supposed to be removed from the ON expression
when the multiple equalities of the ON expression are converted
into an optimal set of equality predicates. It supposed to be
removed from the ON expression as an equality inferred from only
equalities of the WHERE condition. Yet, it did not happened
due to the following bug in the code.
Erroneously the code tried to build multiple equality for ON
expression twice: the first time, when it called optimize_cond()
for the WHERE condition, the second time, when it called
this function for the HAVING condition. When executing
optimize_con() for the WHERE condition a reference
to the multiple equality of the WHERE condition is set
in the multiple equality of the ON expression. This reference
would allow later to convert multiple equalities of the
ON expression into equality predicates. However the
the second call of build_equal_items() for the ON expression
that happened when optimize_cond() was called for the
HAVING condition reset this reference to NULL.
This bug fix blocks calling build_equal_items() for ON
expressions for the second time. In general, it will be
beneficial for many queries as it removes from ON
expressions any equalities that are to be checked for the
WHERE condition.
The patch also fixes two bugs in the list manipulation
operations and a bug in the function
substitute_for_best_equal_field() that resulted
in passing wrong reference to the multiple equalities
of where conditions when processing multiple
equalities of ON expressions.
The code of substitute_for_best_equal_field() and
the code the helper function eliminate_item_equal()
were also streamlined and cleaned up.
Now the conversion of the multiple equalities into
an optimal set of equality predicates first produces
the sequence of the all equalities processing multiple
equalities one by one, and, only after this, it inserts
the equalities at the beginning of the other conditions.
The multiple changes in the output of EXPLAIN
EXTENDED are mainly the result of this streamlining,
but in some cases is the result of the removal of
unneeded equalities from ON expressions. In
some test cases this removal were reflected in the
output of EXPLAIN resulted in disappearance of
“Using where” in some rows of the execution plans.
This bug happened because the executor tried to use a wrong
TABLE REF object when building access keys. It constructed
keys from fields of a materialized table from a ref object
created to construct keys from the fields of the underlying
base table. This could happen only when materialized table
was created for a non-correlated IN subquery and only
when the materialized table used for lookups.
In this case we are guaranteed to be able to construct the
keys from the fields of tables that would be outer tables
for the tables of the IN subquery.
The patch makes sure that no ref objects constructed from
fields of materialized lookup tables are to be used.
The bug could lead to a wrong estimate of the number of expected rows
in the output of the EXPLAIN commands for queries with GROUP BY.
This could be observed in the test case for LP bug 934348.
If the setting of system variables does not allow to use join buffer
for a join query with GROUP BY <f1,...> / ORDER BY <f1,...> then
filesort is not needed if the first joined table is scanned in
the order compatible with order specified by the list <f1,...>.
