Commit 00b5f70a authored by Igor Babaev's avatar Igor Babaev

Fixed LP bug #791761.

An aggregating query over an empty set of a join of two tables
with a rejecting HAVING clause erroneously could return a row.
It could happen in the cases when the optimizer made a conclusion
that the aggregating set was empty.
Wrong results were produced because the server missed initial
setting for aggregation functions in the mentioned cases.
      
parent 64f53eb2
......@@ -570,3 +570,27 @@ ORDER BY t1.f1;
f1
DROP TABLE t1,t2;
End of 5.1 tests
#
# LP bug #791761: MAX over an empty join + HAVING
#
CREATE TABLE t1 (a int, b int , KEY (b)) ;
INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (3,1);
CREATE TABLE t2 (a int NOT NULL ) ;
INSERT INTO t2 VALUES (29);
SELECT MAX(t1.b) FROM t1,t2 WHERE t2.a > 0 HAVING MAX(t1.b) <> 6;
MAX(t1.b)
1
SELECT MAX(t1.b) FROM t1,t2 WHERE t2.a > 0 HAVING MAX(t1.b) IS NULL;
MAX(t1.b)
EXPLAIN
SELECT MAX(t1.b) FROM t1,t2 WHERE t2.a < 0 HAVING MAX(t1.b) <> 6;
id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra
1 SIMPLE NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL Impossible WHERE noticed after reading const tables
SELECT MAX(t1.b) FROM t1,t2 WHERE t2.a < 0 HAVING MAX(t1.b) <> 6;
MAX(t1.b)
CREATE TABLE t3 ( f3 int) ;
INSERT INTO t3 VALUES (NULL);
SELECT MAX(t1.b) AS f FROM t1 JOIN t2 ON t2.a != 0
WHERE (SELECT f3 FROM t3) <> 0 HAVING f <> 6 ;
f
DROP TABLE t1,t2,t3;
......@@ -591,3 +591,28 @@ DROP TABLE t1,t2;
--echo End of 5.1 tests
--echo #
--echo # LP bug #791761: MAX over an empty join + HAVING
--echo #
CREATE TABLE t1 (a int, b int , KEY (b)) ;
INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (3,1);
CREATE TABLE t2 (a int NOT NULL ) ;
INSERT INTO t2 VALUES (29);
SELECT MAX(t1.b) FROM t1,t2 WHERE t2.a > 0 HAVING MAX(t1.b) <> 6;
SELECT MAX(t1.b) FROM t1,t2 WHERE t2.a > 0 HAVING MAX(t1.b) IS NULL;
EXPLAIN
SELECT MAX(t1.b) FROM t1,t2 WHERE t2.a < 0 HAVING MAX(t1.b) <> 6;
SELECT MAX(t1.b) FROM t1,t2 WHERE t2.a < 0 HAVING MAX(t1.b) <> 6;
CREATE TABLE t3 ( f3 int) ;
INSERT INTO t3 VALUES (NULL);
SELECT MAX(t1.b) AS f FROM t1 JOIN t2 ON t2.a != 0
WHERE (SELECT f3 FROM t3) <> 0 HAVING f <> 6 ;
DROP TABLE t1,t2,t3;
......@@ -1020,6 +1020,7 @@ class Item {
virtual bool set_fake_select_as_master_processor(uchar *arg) { return 0; }
virtual bool view_used_tables_processor(uchar *arg) { return 0; }
virtual bool eval_not_null_tables(uchar *opt_arg) { return 0; }
virtual bool clear_sum_processor(uchar *opt_arg) { return 0; }
/* To call bool function for all arguments */
struct bool_func_call_args
......
......@@ -388,6 +388,7 @@ class Item_sum :public Item_result_field
{
return trace_unsupported_by_check_vcol_func_processor(func_name());
}
bool clear_sum_processor(uchar *arg) { clear(); return 0; }
};
......
......@@ -10146,7 +10146,9 @@ return_zero_rows(JOIN *join, select_result *result, List<TABLE_LIST> &tables,
TABLE_LIST *table;
while ((table= ti++))
mark_as_null_row(table->table); // All fields are NULL
if (having && having->val_int() == 0)
if (having &&
!having->walk(&Item::clear_sum_processor, FALSE, NULL) &&
having->val_int() == 0)
send_row=0;
}
if (!(result->send_fields(fields,
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment