| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Step 1: Removal of ORDER BY [LIMIT] from the subquery should be done
earlier and for broader class of subqueries.
The rewrite was done in Item_in_subselect::select_in_like_transformer(),
but this had problems:
- It didn't cover EXISTS subqueries
- It covered IN-subqueries, but was done after the semi-join transformation
was considered inapplicable, because ORDER BY was present.
Remaining issue:
- EXISTS->IN transformation happens before
check_and_do_in_subquery_rewrites() is called, so it is still prevented
by the present ORDER BY.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Parenthesis around table names and derived tables should be allowed
in FROM clauses and some other context as it was in earlier versions.
Returned test queries that used such parenthesis in 10.3 to their
original form. Adjusted test results accordingly.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This bug is caused by pushdown from HAVING into WHERE.
It appears because condition that is pushed wasn't fixed.
It is also discovered that condition pushdown from HAVING into
WHERE is done wrong. There is no need to build clones for some
conditions that can be pushed. They can be simply moved from HAVING
into WHERE without cloning.
build_pushable_cond_for_having_pushdown(),
remove_pushed_top_conjuncts_for_having() methods are changed.
It is found that there is no transformation made for fields of
pushed condition.
field_transformer_for_having_pushdown transformer is added.
New tests are added. Some comments are changed.
|
| |\ |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
with UNION ALL after INTERSECT
EXPLAIN EXTENDED erroneously showed UNION instead of UNION ALL in
the warning if UNION ALL followed INTERSECT or EXCEPT operations.
The bug was in the function st_select_lex_unit::print() that printed
the text of the query used in the warning.
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Optimized the code that removed multiple equalities pushed from HAVING
into WHERE. Now this removal is postponed until all multiple equalities
are eliminated in substitute_for_best_equal_field().
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Condition can be pushed from the HAVING clause into the WHERE clause
if it depends only on the fields that are used in the GROUP BY list
or depends on the fields that are equal to grouping fields.
Aggregate functions can't be pushed down.
How the pushdown is performed on the example:
SELECT t1.a,MAX(t1.b)
FROM t1
GROUP BY t1.a
HAVING (t1.a>2) AND (MAX(c)>12);
=>
SELECT t1.a,MAX(t1.b)
FROM t1
WHERE (t1.a>2)
GROUP BY t1.a
HAVING (MAX(c)>12);
The implementation scheme:
1. Extract the most restrictive condition cond from the HAVING clause of
the select that depends only on the fields that are used in the GROUP BY
list of the select (directly or indirectly through equalities)
2. Save cond as a condition that can be pushed into the WHERE clause
of the select
3. Remove cond from the HAVING clause if it is possible
The optimization is implemented in the function
st_select_lex::pushdown_from_having_into_where().
New test file having_cond_pushdown.test is created.
|
| | | |
|
| |\ \
| |/ |
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
use_stat_tables= PREFERABLY
optimizer_use_condition_selectivity= 4
|
| |\ \
| |/ |
|
| | | |
|
| |/ |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
pthread_equal(pthread_self(), (&(&share->intern_lock)->m_mutex)->thread)' failed in _ma_state_info_write
Limit length of result of "negative" operation to something reasonable
|
| |
|
