use limit efficiently
Bug #36569: UPDATE ... WHERE ... ORDER BY... always does a
filesort even if not required
Also two bugs reported after QA review (before the commit
of bugs above to public trees, no documentation needed):
Bug #53737: Performance regressions after applying patch
for bug 36569
Bug #53742: UPDATEs have no effect after applying patch
for bug 36569
Execution of single-table UPDATE and DELETE statements did not use the
same optimizer as was used in the compilation of SELECT statements.
Instead, it had an optimizer of its own that did not take into account
that you can omit sorting by retrieving rows using an index.
Extra optimization has been added: when applicable, single-table
UPDATE/DELETE statements use an existing index instead of filesort. A
corresponding SELECT query would do the former.
Also handling of the DESC ordering expression has been added when
reverse index scan is applicable.
From now on most single table UPDATE and DELETE statements show the
same disk access patterns as the corresponding SELECT query. We verify
this by comparing the result of SHOW STATUS LIKE 'Sort%
Currently the get_index_for_order function
a) checks quick select index (if any) for compatibility with the
ORDER expression list or
b) chooses the cheapest available compatible index, but only if
the index scan is cheaper than filesort.
Second way is implemented by the new test_if_cheaper_ordering
function (extracted part the test_if_skip_sort_order()).
