Commit 675254d9 authored by Sergey Petrunya's avatar Sergey Petrunya

BUG#670417: Diverging results in maria-5.3-mwl128-dsmrr-cpk with join buffer, attempt 4

- Disable identical key handling optimization when
  IndexConditionPushdown is used
parent ed3087c0
......@@ -462,3 +462,48 @@ FROM t1
WHERE `key1` LIKE CONCAT( LEFT( '1' , 7 ) , '%' )
ORDER BY col1 LIMIT 7;
drop table t0, t1, t2;
#
# BUG#670417: Diverging results in maria-5.3-mwl128-dsmrr-cpk with join buffer (incremental, BKA join)
#
set @save_join_cache_level = @@join_cache_level;
set join_cache_level = 6;
set @save_join_buffer_size=@@join_buffer_size;
set join_buffer_size = 136;
CREATE TABLE t1 (
pk int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
col_int_key int(11) NOT NULL,
col_varchar_key varchar(1) NOT NULL,
col_varchar_nokey varchar(1) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (pk),
KEY col_varchar_key (col_varchar_key,col_int_key)
);
INSERT INTO t1 VALUES
(10,8,'v','v'),(11,8,'f','f'), (12,5,'v','v'),
(13,8,'s','s'),(14,8,'a','a'),(15,6,'p','p'),
(16,7,'z','z'),(17,2,'a','a'),(18,5,'h','h'),
(19,7,'h','h'),(20,2,'v','v'),(21,9,'v','v'),
(22,142,'b','b'),(23,3,'y','y'),(24,0,'v','v'),
(25,3,'m','m'),(26,5,'z','z'),(27,9,'n','n'),
(28,1,'d','d'),(29,107,'a','a');
SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM
t1 AS table2, t1 AS table3
where
table3.col_varchar_key = table2.col_varchar_key AND
table3.col_varchar_key = table2.col_varchar_nokey AND
table3.pk<>0;
COUNT(*)
50
EXPLAIN SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM
t1 AS table2, t1 AS table3
where
table3.col_varchar_key = table2.col_varchar_key AND
table3.col_varchar_key = table2.col_varchar_nokey AND
table3.pk<>0;
id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra
1 SIMPLE table2 ALL col_varchar_key NULL NULL NULL 20 Using where
1 SIMPLE table3 ref PRIMARY,col_varchar_key col_varchar_key 3 test.table2.col_varchar_key 3 Using index condition(BKA); Using where; Using join buffer (flat, BKA join)
set join_cache_level= @save_join_cache_level;
set join_buffer_size= @save_join_buffer_size;
drop table t1;
......@@ -169,3 +169,52 @@ FROM t1
WHERE `key1` LIKE CONCAT( LEFT( '1' , 7 ) , '%' )
ORDER BY col1 LIMIT 7;
drop table t0, t1, t2;
--echo #
--echo # BUG#670417: Diverging results in maria-5.3-mwl128-dsmrr-cpk with join buffer (incremental, BKA join)
--echo #
set @save_join_cache_level = @@join_cache_level;
set join_cache_level = 6;
set @save_join_buffer_size=@@join_buffer_size;
--disable_warnings
set join_buffer_size = 136;
--enable_warnings
CREATE TABLE t1 (
pk int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
col_int_key int(11) NOT NULL,
col_varchar_key varchar(1) NOT NULL,
col_varchar_nokey varchar(1) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (pk),
KEY col_varchar_key (col_varchar_key,col_int_key)
);
INSERT INTO t1 VALUES
(10,8,'v','v'),(11,8,'f','f'), (12,5,'v','v'),
(13,8,'s','s'),(14,8,'a','a'),(15,6,'p','p'),
(16,7,'z','z'),(17,2,'a','a'),(18,5,'h','h'),
(19,7,'h','h'),(20,2,'v','v'),(21,9,'v','v'),
(22,142,'b','b'),(23,3,'y','y'),(24,0,'v','v'),
(25,3,'m','m'),(26,5,'z','z'),(27,9,'n','n'),
(28,1,'d','d'),(29,107,'a','a');
SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM
t1 AS table2, t1 AS table3
where
table3.col_varchar_key = table2.col_varchar_key AND
table3.col_varchar_key = table2.col_varchar_nokey AND
table3.pk<>0;
EXPLAIN SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM
t1 AS table2, t1 AS table3
where
table3.col_varchar_key = table2.col_varchar_key AND
table3.col_varchar_key = table2.col_varchar_nokey AND
table3.pk<>0;
set join_cache_level= @save_join_cache_level;
set join_buffer_size= @save_join_buffer_size;
drop table t1;
......@@ -472,6 +472,42 @@ int Mrr_ordered_index_reader::init(handler *h_arg, RANGE_SEQ_IF *seq_funcs,
mrr_funcs= *seq_funcs;
know_key_tuple_params= FALSE;
buf_manager= buf_manager_arg;
/*
Short: don't do identical key handling when we have a pushed index
condition.
Long: In order to check pushed index condition, we need to have both
index tuple table->record[0] and range_id.
Key_value_records_iterator has special handling for case when we have
multiple (key_value, range_id) pairs with the same key_value. In that
case it will make an index lookup only for the first such element,
for subsequent elements it will only return the new range_id.
The problem here is that h->table->record[0] is shared with the part that
does full record retrieval with rnd_pos() calls, and if we have the
following scenario:
1. We scan ranges {(key_value, range_id1), (key_value, range_id2)}
2. Iterator makes a lookup with key_value, produces the (index_tuple,
range_id1) pair. Index tuple is read into table->record[0], which
allows us to check index condition.
3. At this point, we figure that key buffer is full, so we sort it,
and return control to Mrr_ordered_rndpos_reader.
3.1 Mrr_ordered_rndpos_reader gets rowids and makes rnd_pos() calls, which
puts some arbitrary data into table->record[0] in the process.
3.2 We ask the iterator for the next (rowid, range_id) pair. The iterator
puts in range_id2, and that shuld be sufficient (this is identical key
handling at work)
However, index tuple in table->record[0] has been destroyed and we
can't check index conditon for (index_tuple, range_id2) now.
TODO: It is possible to support identical key handling and index condition
pushdown, working together (one possible solution is to save/restore the
contents of table->record[0]). We will probably implement that.
*/
disallow_identical_key_handling= test(mrr_funcs.skip_index_tuple);
return 0;
}
......@@ -1123,7 +1159,8 @@ int Key_value_records_iterator::init(Mrr_ordered_index_reader *owner_arg)
uchar *save_cur_index_tuple= cur_index_tuple;
while (!identical_key_it.read())
{
if (Mrr_ordered_index_reader::key_tuple_cmp(owner, key_in_buf,
if (owner->disallow_identical_key_handling ||
Mrr_ordered_index_reader::key_tuple_cmp(owner, key_in_buf,
cur_index_tuple))
break;
last_identical_key_ptr= cur_index_tuple;
......
......@@ -289,6 +289,12 @@ class Mrr_ordered_index_reader : public Mrr_index_reader
/* TRUE <=> need range association, buffers hold {rowid, range_id} pairs */
bool is_mrr_assoc;
/*
TRUE <=> Don't do optimizations for identical key value (see comment in
Mrr_ordered_index_reader::init for details)
*/
bool disallow_identical_key_handling;
/* Range sequence iteration members */
RANGE_SEQ_IF mrr_funcs;
range_seq_t mrr_iter;
......
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