wasCSharpSQLite – Blame information for rev 7
?pathlinks?
Rev | Author | Line No. | Line |
---|---|---|---|
1 | office | 1 | # 2007 November 29 |
2 | # |
||
3 | # The author disclaims copyright to this source code. In place of |
||
4 | # a legal notice, here is a blessing: |
||
5 | # |
||
6 | # May you do good and not evil. |
||
7 | # May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others. |
||
8 | # May you share freely, never taking more than you give. |
||
9 | # |
||
10 | #*********************************************************************** |
||
11 | # This file tests the optimisations made in November 2007 of expressions |
||
12 | # of the following form: |
||
13 | # |
||
14 | # <value> IN (SELECT <column> FROM <table>) |
||
15 | # |
||
16 | # $Id: in3.test,v 1.5 2008/08/04 03:51:24 danielk1977 Exp $ |
||
17 | |||
18 | set testdir [file dirname $argv0] |
||
19 | source $testdir/tester.tcl |
||
20 | |||
21 | ifcapable !subquery { |
||
22 | finish_test |
||
23 | return |
||
24 | } |
||
25 | |||
26 | # Return the number of OpenEphemeral instructions used in the |
||
27 | # implementation of the sql statement passed as a an argument. |
||
28 | # |
||
29 | proc nEphemeral {sql} { |
||
30 | set nEph 0 |
||
31 | foreach op [execsql "EXPLAIN $sql"] { |
||
32 | if {$op eq "OpenEphemeral"} {incr nEph} |
||
33 | } |
||
34 | set nEph |
||
35 | } |
||
36 | |||
37 | # This proc works the same way as execsql, except that the number |
||
38 | # of OpenEphemeral instructions used in the implementation of the |
||
39 | # statement is inserted into the start of the returned list. |
||
40 | # |
||
41 | proc exec_neph {sql} { |
||
42 | return [concat [nEphemeral $sql] [execsql $sql]] |
||
43 | } |
||
44 | |||
45 | do_test in3-1.1 { |
||
46 | execsql { |
||
47 | CREATE TABLE t1(a PRIMARY KEY, b); |
||
48 | INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(1, 2); |
||
49 | INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(3, 4); |
||
50 | INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(5, 6); |
||
51 | } |
||
52 | } {} |
||
53 | |||
54 | # All of these queries should avoid using a temp-table: |
||
55 | # |
||
56 | do_test in3-1.2 { |
||
57 | exec_neph { SELECT rowid FROM t1 WHERE rowid IN (SELECT rowid FROM t1); } |
||
58 | } {0 1 2 3} |
||
59 | do_test in3-1.3 { |
||
60 | exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN (SELECT a FROM t1); } |
||
61 | } {0 1 3 5} |
||
62 | do_test in3-1.4 { |
||
63 | exec_neph { SELECT rowid FROM t1 WHERE rowid+0 IN (SELECT rowid FROM t1); } |
||
64 | } {0 1 2 3} |
||
65 | do_test in3-1.5 { |
||
66 | exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a+0 IN (SELECT a FROM t1); } |
||
67 | } {0 1 3 5} |
||
68 | |||
69 | # Because none of the sub-select queries in the following statements |
||
70 | # match the pattern ("SELECT <column> FROM <table>"), the following do |
||
71 | # require a temp table. |
||
72 | # |
||
73 | do_test in3-1.6 { |
||
74 | exec_neph { SELECT rowid FROM t1 WHERE rowid IN (SELECT rowid+0 FROM t1); } |
||
75 | } {1 1 2 3} |
||
76 | do_test in3-1.7 { |
||
77 | exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN (SELECT a+0 FROM t1); } |
||
78 | } {1 1 3 5} |
||
79 | do_test in3-1.8 { |
||
80 | exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN (SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE 1); } |
||
81 | } {1 1 3 5} |
||
82 | do_test in3-1.9 { |
||
83 | exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN (SELECT a FROM t1 GROUP BY a); } |
||
84 | } {1 1 3 5} |
||
85 | |||
86 | # This should not use a temp-table. Even though the sub-select does |
||
87 | # not exactly match the pattern "SELECT <column> FROM <table>", in |
||
88 | # this case the ORDER BY is a no-op and can be ignored. |
||
89 | do_test in3-1.10 { |
||
90 | exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN (SELECT a FROM t1 ORDER BY a); } |
||
91 | } {0 1 3 5} |
||
92 | |||
93 | # These do use the temp-table. Adding the LIMIT clause means the |
||
94 | # ORDER BY cannot be ignored. |
||
95 | do_test in3-1.11 { |
||
96 | exec_neph {SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN (SELECT a FROM t1 ORDER BY a LIMIT 1)} |
||
97 | } {1 1} |
||
98 | do_test in3-1.12 { |
||
99 | exec_neph { |
||
100 | SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN (SELECT a FROM t1 ORDER BY a LIMIT 1 OFFSET 1) |
||
101 | } |
||
102 | } {1 3} |
||
103 | |||
104 | # Has to use a temp-table because of the compound sub-select. |
||
105 | # |
||
106 | ifcapable compound { |
||
107 | do_test in3-1.13 { |
||
108 | exec_neph { |
||
109 | SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN ( |
||
110 | SELECT a FROM t1 UNION ALL SELECT a FROM t1 |
||
111 | ) |
||
112 | } |
||
113 | } {1 1 3 5} |
||
114 | } |
||
115 | |||
116 | # The first of these queries has to use the temp-table, because the |
||
117 | # collation sequence used for the index on "t1.a" does not match the |
||
118 | # collation sequence used by the "IN" comparison. The second does not |
||
119 | # require a temp-table, because the collation sequences match. |
||
120 | # |
||
121 | do_test in3-1.14 { |
||
122 | exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a COLLATE nocase IN (SELECT a FROM t1) } |
||
123 | } {1 1 3 5} |
||
124 | do_test in3-1.15 { |
||
125 | exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a COLLATE binary IN (SELECT a FROM t1) } |
||
126 | } {0 1 3 5} |
||
127 | |||
128 | # Neither of these queries require a temp-table. The collation sequence |
||
129 | # makes no difference when using a rowid. |
||
130 | # |
||
131 | do_test in3-1.16 { |
||
132 | exec_neph {SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a COLLATE nocase IN (SELECT rowid FROM t1)} |
||
133 | } {0 1 3} |
||
134 | do_test in3-1.17 { |
||
135 | exec_neph {SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a COLLATE binary IN (SELECT rowid FROM t1)} |
||
136 | } {0 1 3} |
||
137 | |||
138 | # The following tests - in3.2.* - test a bug that was difficult to track |
||
139 | # down during development. They are not particularly well focused. |
||
140 | # |
||
141 | do_test in3-2.1 { |
||
142 | execsql { |
||
143 | DROP TABLE IF EXISTS t1; |
||
144 | CREATE TABLE t1(w int, x int, y int); |
||
145 | CREATE TABLE t2(p int, q int, r int, s int); |
||
146 | } |
||
147 | for {set i 1} {$i<=100} {incr i} { |
||
148 | set w $i |
||
149 | set x [expr {int(log($i)/log(2))}] |
||
150 | set y [expr {$i*$i + 2*$i + 1}] |
||
151 | execsql "INSERT INTO t1 VALUES($w,$x,$y)" |
||
152 | } |
||
153 | set maxy [execsql {select max(y) from t1}] |
||
154 | db eval { INSERT INTO t2 SELECT 101-w, x, $maxy+1-y, y FROM t1 } |
||
155 | } {} |
||
156 | do_test in3-2.2 { |
||
157 | execsql { |
||
158 | SELECT rowid |
||
159 | FROM t1 |
||
160 | WHERE rowid IN (SELECT rowid FROM t1 WHERE rowid IN (1, 2)); |
||
161 | } |
||
162 | } {1 2} |
||
163 | do_test in3-2.3 { |
||
164 | execsql { |
||
165 | select rowid from t1 where rowid IN (-1,2,4) |
||
166 | } |
||
167 | } {2 4} |
||
168 | do_test in3-2.4 { |
||
169 | execsql { |
||
170 | SELECT rowid FROM t1 WHERE rowid IN |
||
171 | (select rowid from t1 where rowid IN (-1,2,4)) |
||
172 | } |
||
173 | } {2 4} |
||
174 | |||
175 | #------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
||
176 | # This next block of tests - in3-3.* - verify that column affinity is |
||
177 | # correctly handled in cases where an index might be used to optimise |
||
178 | # an IN (SELECT) expression. |
||
179 | # |
||
180 | do_test in3-3.1 { |
||
181 | catch {execsql { |
||
182 | DROP TABLE t1; |
||
183 | DROP TABLE t2; |
||
184 | }} |
||
185 | |||
186 | execsql { |
||
187 | |||
188 | CREATE TABLE t1(a BLOB, b NUMBER ,c TEXT); |
||
189 | CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t1_i1 ON t1(a); /* no affinity */ |
||
190 | CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t1_i2 ON t1(b); /* numeric affinity */ |
||
191 | CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t1_i3 ON t1(c); /* text affinity */ |
||
192 | |||
193 | CREATE TABLE t2(x BLOB, y NUMBER, z TEXT); |
||
194 | CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t2_i1 ON t2(x); /* no affinity */ |
||
195 | CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t2_i2 ON t2(y); /* numeric affinity */ |
||
196 | CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t2_i3 ON t2(z); /* text affinity */ |
||
197 | |||
198 | INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(1, 1, 1); |
||
199 | INSERT INTO t2 VALUES('1', '1', '1'); |
||
200 | } |
||
201 | } {} |
||
202 | |||
203 | do_test in3-3.2 { |
||
204 | # No affinity is applied before comparing "x" and "a". Therefore |
||
205 | # the index can be used (the comparison is false, text!=number). |
||
206 | exec_neph { SELECT x IN (SELECT a FROM t1) FROM t2 } |
||
207 | } {0 0} |
||
208 | do_test in3-3.3 { |
||
209 | # Logically, numeric affinity is applied to both sides before |
||
210 | # the comparison. Therefore it is possible to use index t1_i2. |
||
211 | exec_neph { SELECT x IN (SELECT b FROM t1) FROM t2 } |
||
212 | } {0 1} |
||
213 | do_test in3-3.4 { |
||
214 | # No affinity is applied before the comparison takes place. Making |
||
215 | # it possible to use index t1_i3. |
||
216 | exec_neph { SELECT x IN (SELECT c FROM t1) FROM t2 } |
||
217 | } {0 1} |
||
218 | |||
219 | do_test in3-3.5 { |
||
220 | # Numeric affinity should be applied to each side before the comparison |
||
221 | # takes place. Therefore we cannot use index t1_i1, which has no affinity. |
||
222 | exec_neph { SELECT y IN (SELECT a FROM t1) FROM t2 } |
||
223 | } {1 1} |
||
224 | do_test in3-3.6 { |
||
225 | # Numeric affinity is applied to both sides before |
||
226 | # the comparison. Therefore it is possible to use index t1_i2. |
||
227 | exec_neph { SELECT y IN (SELECT b FROM t1) FROM t2 } |
||
228 | } {0 1} |
||
229 | do_test in3-3.7 { |
||
230 | # Numeric affinity is applied before the comparison takes place. |
||
231 | # Making it impossible to use index t1_i3. |
||
232 | exec_neph { SELECT y IN (SELECT c FROM t1) FROM t2 } |
||
233 | } {1 1} |
||
234 | |||
235 | #--------------------------------------------------------------------- |
||
236 | # |
||
237 | # Test using a multi-column index. |
||
238 | # |
||
239 | do_test in3-4.1 { |
||
240 | execsql { |
||
241 | CREATE TABLE t3(a, b, c); |
||
242 | CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t3_i ON t3(b, a); |
||
243 | } |
||
244 | |||
245 | execsql { |
||
246 | INSERT INTO t3 VALUES(1, 'numeric', 2); |
||
247 | INSERT INTO t3 VALUES(2, 'text', 2); |
||
248 | INSERT INTO t3 VALUES(3, 'real', 2); |
||
249 | INSERT INTO t3 VALUES(4, 'none', 2); |
||
250 | } |
||
251 | } {} |
||
252 | do_test in3-4.2 { |
||
253 | exec_neph { SELECT 'text' IN (SELECT b FROM t3) } |
||
254 | } {0 1} |
||
255 | do_test in3-4.3 { |
||
256 | exec_neph { SELECT 'TEXT' COLLATE nocase IN (SELECT b FROM t3) } |
||
257 | } {1 1} |
||
258 | do_test in3-4.4 { |
||
259 | # A temp table must be used because t3_i.b is not guaranteed to be unique. |
||
260 | exec_neph { SELECT b FROM t3 WHERE b IN (SELECT b FROM t3) } |
||
261 | } {1 none numeric real text} |
||
262 | do_test in3-4.5 { |
||
263 | execsql { CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t3_i2 ON t3(b) } |
||
264 | exec_neph { SELECT b FROM t3 WHERE b IN (SELECT b FROM t3) } |
||
265 | } {0 none numeric real text} |
||
266 | do_test in3-4.6 { |
||
267 | execsql { DROP INDEX t3_i2 } |
||
268 | } {} |
||
269 | |||
270 | # The following two test cases verify that ticket #2991 has been fixed. |
||
271 | # |
||
272 | do_test in3-5.1 { |
||
273 | execsql { |
||
274 | CREATE TABLE Folders( |
||
275 | folderid INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, |
||
276 | parentid INTEGER, |
||
277 | rootid INTEGER, |
||
278 | path VARCHAR(255) |
||
279 | ); |
||
280 | } |
||
281 | } {} |
||
282 | do_test in3-5.2 { |
||
283 | catchsql { |
||
284 | DELETE FROM Folders WHERE folderid IN |
||
285 | (SELECT folderid FROM Folder WHERE path LIKE 'C:\MP3\Albums\' || '%'); |
||
286 | } |
||
287 | } {1 {no such table: Folder}} |
||
288 | |||
289 | finish_test |