fulltext search was initialized for all MATCH ... AGAINST items
at the end of the JOIN::optimize(). But since 5.3 derived tables
are initialized lazily on first use, very late in the sub_select().
Skip Item_func_match::init_search initialization if the corresponding
table isn't open yet; repeat fulltext initialization for all
not-yet-initialized MATCH ... AGAINST items after creating derived tables.
init join->top_join_tab_count to be in sync with join->join_tab=stat,
otherwise a query can be killed in-between and join_tab's won't be deleted
(JOIN::cleanup won't call JOIN_TAB::cleanup)
One of them is quite serious: the function table_cond_selectivity used
the TABLE_REF structure for ref/eq_ref access methods as if they had been
filled. In fact these structure are filled after the best execution plan
has been chosen.
The other bugs happened due to:
- an erroneous attempt at get statistics on the result of materialization
of a view
- incorrect handling of ranges with no left/right limits when calculating
selectivity of range conditions on non-indexed columns
- lack of cleanup for some newly introduced fields
In some cases, when using views the optimizer incorrectly determined
possible join orders for queries with nested outer and inner joins.
This could lead to invalid execution plans for such queries.
This is a bug in the legacy code. It did not manifest itself because
it was masked by other bugs that were fixed by the patches for
mdev-4172 and mdev-4177.
This bug is a regression bug. The regression was introduced by
the patch for mdev-3851, that tried to weaken the condition when
a ref access with an extended key can be converted to an eq_ref
access. The patch incorrectly formed this condition. As a result,
while improving performance for some queries, the patch caused
worse performance for another queries.
Do not include BLOB fields into the key to access the temporary
table created for a materialized view/derived table.
BLOB components are not allowed in keys.
The function remove_eq_cond removes the parts of a disjunction
for which it has been proved that they are always true. In the
result of this removal the disjunction may be converted into a
formula without OR that must be merged into the the AND formula
that contains the disjunction.
The merging of two AND conditions must take into account the
multiple equalities that may be part of each of them.
These multiple equality must be merged and become part of the
and object built as the result of the merge of the AND conditions.
Erroneously the function remove_eq_cond lacked the code that
would merge multiple equalities of the merged AND conditions.
This could lead to confusing situations when at the same AND
level there were two multiple equalities with common members
and the list of equal items contained only some of these
multiple equalities.
This, in its turn, could lead to an incorrect work of the
function substitute_for_best_equal_field when it tried to optimize
ref accesses. This resulted in forming invalid TABLE_REF objects
that were used to build look-up keys when materialized subqueries
were exploited.
This bug in the legacy code could manifest itself in queries with
semi-join materialized subqueries.
When a subquery is materialized all conditions that are imposed
only on the columns belonging to the tables from the subquery
are taken into account.The code responsible for subquery optimizations
that employes subquery materialization makes sure to remove these
conditions from the WHERE conditions of the query obtained after
it has transformed the original query into a query with a semi-join.
If the condition to be removed is an equality condition it could
be added to ON expressions and/or conditions from disjunctive branches
(parts of OR conditions) in an attempt to generate better access keys
to the tables of the query. Such equalities are supposed to be removed
later from all the formulas where they have been added to.
However, erroneously, this was not done in some cases when an ON
expression and/or a disjunctive part of the OR condition could
be converted into one multiple equality. As a result some equality
predicates over columns belonging to the tables of the materialized
subquery remained in the ON condition and/or the a disjunctive
part of the OR condition, and the excuter later, when trying to
evaluate them, returned wrong answers as the values of the fields
from these equalities were not valid.
This happened because any standalone multiple equality (a multiple
equality that are not ANDed with any other predicates) lacked
the information about equality predicates inherited from upper
levels (in particular, inherited from the WHERE condition).
The fix adds a reference to such information to any standalone
multiple equality.
