best_access_path() is called from two optimization phases:
1. Plan choice phase, in choose_plan(). Here, the join prefix being
considered is in join->positions[]
2. Plan refinement stage, in fix_semijoin_strategies_for_picked_join_order
Here, the join prefix is in join->best_positions[]
It used to access join->positions[] from stage #2. This didnt cause any
valgrind or asan failures (as join->positions[] has been written-to before)
but the effect was similar to that of reading the random data:
The join prefix we've picked (in join->best_positions) could have
nothing in common with the join prefix that was last to be considered
(in join->positions).
or server crashes in JOIN::fix_all_splittings_in_plan after EXPLAIN
This patch resolves the problem of overflowing when performing
calculations to estimate the cost of an evaluated query execution plan.
The overflowing in a non-debug build could cause different kind of
problems uncluding crashes of the server.
This patch complements the original patch for MDEV-18896 that prevents
conversions to semi-joins in tableless selects used in INSERT statements
in post-5.5 versions of the server.
The test case was corrected as well to ensure that potential conversion
to jtbm semi-joins is also checked (the problem was that one of
the preceeding testcases in subselect_sj.test did not restore the
state of the optimizer switch leaving the 'materialization' in the state
'off' and so blocking this check).
Noticed an inconsistency in the state of select_lex::table_list used
in INSERT statements and left a comment about this.
This commit is based on the work of Michal Schorm, rebased on the
earliest MariaDB version.
Th command line used to generate this diff was:
find ./ -type f \
-exec sed -i -e 's/Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, /Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, /g' {} \; \
-exec sed -i -e 's/Foundation, Inc. 59 Temple Place.* Suite 330, Boston, /Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, /g' {} \; \
-exec sed -i -e 's/MA.*.....-1307.*USA/MA 02110-1335 USA/g' {} \; \
-exec sed -i -e 's/Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple/Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin/g' {} \; \
-exec sed -i -e 's/Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA.*02111-1307.*USA/Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1335 USA/g' {} \; \
-exec sed -i -e 's/MA.*.....-1307/MA 02110-1335/g' {} \;
If an IN-subquery is used in a table-less select the current code
should never consider it as candidate for semi-join optimizations.
Yet the function check_and_do_in_subquery_rewrites() improperly
checked the property "to be a table-less select". As a result
such select in IN subquery was used in INSERT .. SELECT then
the IN subquery by mistake was registered as a semi-join subquery
and convert_subq_to_sj() was called for it. However the code of
this function does not assume that the parent select of the subquery
could be a table-less select.
In this case we are setting the field Item_func_eq::in_eqaulity_no for the semi-join equalities.
This helps us to remove these equalites as the inner tables are not available during parent select execution
while the outer tables are not available during materialization phase.
We only have it set for the equalites for the fields involved with the IN subquery
and reset it for the equalities which do not belong to the IN subquery.
For example in case of nested IN subqueries:
SELECT t1.a FROM t1 WHERE t1.a IN
(SELECT t2.a FROM t2 where t2.b IN
(select t3.b from t3 where t3.c=27 ))
there are two equalites involving the fields of the IN subquery
1) t2.b = t3.b : the field Item_func_eq::in_eqaulity_no is set when we merge the grandchild select into the child select
2) t1.a = t2.a : the field Item_func_eq::in_eqaulity_no is set when we merge the child select into the parent select
But when we perform case 2) we should ensure that we reset the equalities in the child's WHERE clause.
with join_cache_level>2
During muliple equality propagation for a query in which we have an IN subquery, the items in the select list of the
subquery may not be part of the multiple equality because there might be another occurence of the same field in the
where clause of the subquery.
So we keyuse_is_valid_for_access_in_chosen_plan function which expects the items in the select list of the subquery to
be same to the ones in the multiple equality (through these multiple equalities we create keyuse array).
The solution would be that we expect the same field not the same Item because when we have SEMI JOIN MATERIALIZATION SCAN,
we use copy back technique to copies back the materialised table fields to the original fields of the base tables.
work in the IN subqueries
The pushdown into the materialized derived table/view wasn't done because
optimize() for the derived was called before any conditions that can
be pushed down were extracted. So optimize() in
convert_join_subqueries_to_semijoins() method is called too early and is
unnecessary. The second optimize() call in mysql_handle_single_derived()
is enough.
The problem was that SJ (semi-join) used secondary list (array) of subquery select list. The items there was prepared once then cleaned up (but not really freed from memory because it was made in statement memory).
Original list was not prepared after first execution because select was removed by conversion to SJ.
The solution is to use original list but prepare it first.
Any expensive WHERE condition for a table-less query with
implicit aggregation was lost. As a result the used aggregate
functions were calculated over a non-empty set of rows even
in the case when the condition was false.
Conversion of a subquery to a semi-join is blocked when we have an
IN subquery predicate in the on_expr of an outer join. Currently this
scenario is handled but the cases when an IN subquery predicate is wrapped
inside a Item_in_optimizer item then this blocking is not done.
Make differentiation between pullout for merge and pulout of outer field during exists2in transformation.
In last case the field was outer and so we can safely start from name resolution context of the SELECT where it was pulled.
Old behavior lead to inconsistence between list of tables and outer name resolution context (which skips one SELECT for merge purposes) which creates problem vor name resolution.
