diff options
| author | Sergey Glukhov <sergey.glukhov@oracle.com> | 2011-04-22 11:20:55 +0400 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Sergey Glukhov <sergey.glukhov@oracle.com> | 2011-04-22 11:20:55 +0400 |
| commit | a5e8d9029b1340762bc88226c0a9344f241a044c (patch) | |
| tree | a6058ac3378c83c416403b60b9c3c0a01fcca7b0 /mysql-test/r/having.result | |
| parent | f3b024cafa4c316774c8122031a1bbbc08a83379 (diff) | |
| download | mariadb-git-a5e8d9029b1340762bc88226c0a9344f241a044c.tar.gz | |
Bug#11756928 48916: SERVER INCORRECTLY PROCESSING HAVING CLAUSES WITH AN ORDER BY CLAUSE
Before sorting HAVING condition is split into two parts,
first part is a table related condition and the rest of is
HAVING part. Extraction of HAVING part does not take into account
the fact that some of conditions might be non-const but
have 'used_tables' == 0 (independent subqueries)
and because of that these conditions are cut off by
make_cond_for_table() function.
The fix is to use (table_map) 0 instead of used_tables in
third argument for make_cond_for_table() function.
It allows to extract elements which belong to sorted
table and in addition elements which are independend
subqueries.
mysql-test/r/having.result:
test case
mysql-test/t/having.test:
test case
sql/sql_select.cc:
The fix is to use (table_map) 0 instead of used_tables in
third argument for make_cond_for_table() function.
It allows to extract elements which belong to sorted
table and in addition elements which are independend
subqueries.
Diffstat (limited to 'mysql-test/r/having.result')
| -rw-r--r-- | mysql-test/r/having.result | 22 |
1 files changed, 22 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/mysql-test/r/having.result b/mysql-test/r/having.result index cd1b4ae0218..4253ac7e5c3 100644 --- a/mysql-test/r/having.result +++ b/mysql-test/r/having.result @@ -545,4 +545,26 @@ FROM t1 JOIN t2 ON t2.f2 LIKE 'x' HAVING field1 < 7; field1 DROP TABLE t1,t2; +# +# Bug#48916 Server incorrectly processing HAVING clauses with an ORDER BY clause +# +CREATE TABLE t1 (f1 INT, f2 INT); +INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (1, 0), (2, 1), (3, 2); +CREATE TABLE t2 (f1 INT, f2 INT); +SELECT t1.f1 +FROM t1 +HAVING (3, 2) IN (SELECT f1, f2 FROM t2) AND t1.f1 >= 0 +ORDER BY t1.f1; +f1 +SELECT t1.f1 +FROM t1 +HAVING (3, 2) IN (SELECT 4, 2) AND t1.f1 >= 0 +ORDER BY t1.f1; +f1 +SELECT t1.f1 +FROM t1 +HAVING 2 IN (SELECT f2 FROM t2) AND t1.f1 >= 0 +ORDER BY t1.f1; +f1 +DROP TABLE t1,t2; End of 5.1 tests |