290 lines
		
	
	
		
			8.5 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Plaintext
		
	
	
	
	
	
			
		
		
	
	
			290 lines
		
	
	
		
			8.5 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Plaintext
		
	
	
	
	
	
| # 2007 November 29
 | |
| #
 | |
| # The author disclaims copyright to this source code.  In place of
 | |
| # a legal notice, here is a blessing:
 | |
| #
 | |
| #    May you do good and not evil.
 | |
| #    May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others.
 | |
| #    May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
 | |
| #
 | |
| #***********************************************************************
 | |
| # This file tests the optimisations made in November 2007 of expressions 
 | |
| # of the following form:
 | |
| #
 | |
| #     <value> IN (SELECT <column> FROM <table>)
 | |
| #
 | |
| # $Id: in3.test,v 1.5 2008/08/04 03:51:24 danielk1977 Exp $
 | |
| 
 | |
| set testdir [file dirname $argv0]
 | |
| source $testdir/tester.tcl
 | |
| 
 | |
| ifcapable !subquery {
 | |
|   finish_test
 | |
|   return
 | |
| }
 | |
| 
 | |
| # Return the number of OpenEphemeral instructions used in the
 | |
| # implementation of the sql statement passed as a an argument.
 | |
| #
 | |
| proc nEphemeral {sql} {
 | |
|   set nEph 0
 | |
|   foreach op [execsql "EXPLAIN $sql"] {
 | |
|     if {$op eq "OpenEphemeral"} {incr nEph}
 | |
|   }
 | |
|   set nEph
 | |
| }
 | |
| 
 | |
| # This proc works the same way as execsql, except that the number
 | |
| # of OpenEphemeral instructions used in the implementation of the
 | |
| # statement is inserted into the start of the returned list.
 | |
| #
 | |
| proc exec_neph {sql} {
 | |
|   return [concat [nEphemeral $sql] [execsql $sql]]
 | |
| }
 | |
| 
 | |
| do_test in3-1.1 {
 | |
|   execsql {
 | |
|     CREATE TABLE t1(a PRIMARY KEY, b);
 | |
|     INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(1, 2);
 | |
|     INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(3, 4);
 | |
|     INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(5, 6);
 | |
|   }
 | |
| } {}
 | |
| 
 | |
| # All of these queries should avoid using a temp-table:
 | |
| #
 | |
| do_test in3-1.2 {
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT rowid FROM t1 WHERE rowid IN (SELECT rowid FROM t1); }
 | |
| } {0 1 2 3}
 | |
| do_test in3-1.3 {
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN (SELECT a FROM t1); }
 | |
| } {0 1 3 5}
 | |
| do_test in3-1.4 {
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT rowid FROM t1 WHERE rowid+0 IN (SELECT rowid FROM t1); }
 | |
| } {0 1 2 3}
 | |
| do_test in3-1.5 {
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a+0 IN (SELECT a FROM t1); }
 | |
| } {0 1 3 5}
 | |
| 
 | |
| # Because none of the sub-select queries in the following statements
 | |
| # match the pattern ("SELECT <column> FROM <table>"), the following do 
 | |
| # require a temp table.
 | |
| #
 | |
| do_test in3-1.6 {
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT rowid FROM t1 WHERE rowid IN (SELECT rowid+0 FROM t1); }
 | |
| } {1 1 2 3}
 | |
| do_test in3-1.7 {
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN (SELECT a+0 FROM t1); }
 | |
| } {1 1 3 5}
 | |
| do_test in3-1.8 {
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN (SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE 1); }
 | |
| } {1 1 3 5}
 | |
| do_test in3-1.9 {
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN (SELECT a FROM t1 GROUP BY a); }
 | |
| } {1 1 3 5}
 | |
| 
 | |
| # This should not use a temp-table. Even though the sub-select does
 | |
| # not exactly match the pattern "SELECT <column> FROM <table>", in
 | |
| # this case the ORDER BY is a no-op and can be ignored.
 | |
| do_test in3-1.10 {
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN (SELECT a FROM t1 ORDER BY a); }
 | |
| } {0 1 3 5}
 | |
| 
 | |
| # These do use the temp-table. Adding the LIMIT clause means the 
 | |
| # ORDER BY cannot be ignored.
 | |
| do_test in3-1.11 {
 | |
|   exec_neph {SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN (SELECT a FROM t1 ORDER BY a LIMIT 1)}
 | |
| } {1 1}
 | |
| do_test in3-1.12 {
 | |
|   exec_neph {
 | |
|     SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN (SELECT a FROM t1 ORDER BY a LIMIT 1 OFFSET 1)
 | |
|   }
 | |
| } {1 3}
 | |
| 
 | |
| # Has to use a temp-table because of the compound sub-select.
 | |
| #
 | |
| ifcapable compound {
 | |
|   do_test in3-1.13 {
 | |
|     exec_neph {
 | |
|       SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a IN (
 | |
|         SELECT a FROM t1 UNION ALL SELECT a FROM t1
 | |
|       )
 | |
|     }
 | |
|   } {1 1 3 5}
 | |
| }
 | |
| 
 | |
| # The first of these queries has to use the temp-table, because the 
 | |
| # collation sequence used for the index on "t1.a" does not match the
 | |
| # collation sequence used by the "IN" comparison. The second does not
 | |
| # require a temp-table, because the collation sequences match.
 | |
| #
 | |
| do_test in3-1.14 {
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a COLLATE nocase IN (SELECT a FROM t1) }
 | |
| } {1 1 3 5}
 | |
| do_test in3-1.15 {
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a COLLATE binary IN (SELECT a FROM t1) }
 | |
| } {0 1 3 5}
 | |
| 
 | |
| # Neither of these queries require a temp-table. The collation sequence
 | |
| # makes no difference when using a rowid.
 | |
| #
 | |
| do_test in3-1.16 {
 | |
|   exec_neph {SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a COLLATE nocase IN (SELECT rowid FROM t1)}
 | |
| } {0 1 3}
 | |
| do_test in3-1.17 {
 | |
|   exec_neph {SELECT a FROM t1 WHERE a COLLATE binary IN (SELECT rowid FROM t1)}
 | |
| } {0 1 3}
 | |
| 
 | |
| # The following tests - in3.2.* - test a bug that was difficult to track
 | |
| # down during development. They are not particularly well focused.
 | |
| #
 | |
| do_test in3-2.1 {
 | |
|   execsql {
 | |
|     DROP TABLE IF EXISTS t1;
 | |
|     CREATE TABLE t1(w int, x int, y int);
 | |
|     CREATE TABLE t2(p int, q int, r int, s int);
 | |
|   }
 | |
|   for {set i 1} {$i<=100} {incr i} {
 | |
|     set w $i
 | |
|     set x [expr {int(log($i)/log(2))}]
 | |
|     set y [expr {$i*$i + 2*$i + 1}]
 | |
|     execsql "INSERT INTO t1 VALUES($w,$x,$y)"
 | |
|   }
 | |
|   set maxy [execsql {select max(y) from t1}]
 | |
|   db eval { INSERT INTO t2 SELECT 101-w, x, $maxy+1-y, y FROM t1 }
 | |
| } {}
 | |
| do_test in3-2.2 {
 | |
|   execsql {
 | |
|     SELECT rowid 
 | |
|     FROM t1 
 | |
|     WHERE rowid IN (SELECT rowid FROM t1 WHERE rowid IN (1, 2));
 | |
|   }
 | |
| } {1 2}
 | |
| do_test in3-2.3 {
 | |
|   execsql {
 | |
|     select rowid from t1 where rowid IN (-1,2,4)
 | |
|   }
 | |
| } {2 4}
 | |
| do_test in3-2.4 {
 | |
|   execsql {
 | |
|     SELECT rowid FROM t1 WHERE rowid IN 
 | |
|        (select rowid from t1 where rowid IN (-1,2,4))
 | |
|   }
 | |
| } {2 4}
 | |
| 
 | |
| #-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | |
| # This next block of tests - in3-3.* - verify that column affinity is
 | |
| # correctly handled in cases where an index might be used to optimise
 | |
| # an IN (SELECT) expression.
 | |
| #
 | |
| do_test in3-3.1 {
 | |
|   catch {execsql {
 | |
|     DROP TABLE t1;
 | |
|     DROP TABLE t2;
 | |
|   }}
 | |
| 
 | |
|   execsql {
 | |
| 
 | |
|     CREATE TABLE t1(a BLOB, b NUMBER ,c TEXT);
 | |
|     CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t1_i1 ON t1(a);        /* no affinity */
 | |
|     CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t1_i2 ON t1(b);        /* numeric affinity */
 | |
|     CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t1_i3 ON t1(c);        /* text affinity */
 | |
| 
 | |
|     CREATE TABLE t2(x BLOB, y NUMBER, z TEXT);
 | |
|     CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t2_i1 ON t2(x);        /* no affinity */
 | |
|     CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t2_i2 ON t2(y);        /* numeric affinity */
 | |
|     CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t2_i3 ON t2(z);        /* text affinity */
 | |
| 
 | |
|     INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(1, 1, 1);
 | |
|     INSERT INTO t2 VALUES('1', '1', '1');
 | |
|   }
 | |
| } {}
 | |
| 
 | |
| do_test in3-3.2 {
 | |
|   # No affinity is applied before comparing "x" and "a". Therefore
 | |
|   # the index can be used (the comparison is false, text!=number).
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT x IN (SELECT a FROM t1) FROM t2 }
 | |
| } {0 0}
 | |
| do_test in3-3.3 {
 | |
|   # Logically, numeric affinity is applied to both sides before 
 | |
|   # the comparison.  Therefore it is possible to use index t1_i2.
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT x IN (SELECT b FROM t1) FROM t2 }
 | |
| } {0 1}
 | |
| do_test in3-3.4 {
 | |
|   # No affinity is applied before the comparison takes place. Making
 | |
|   # it possible to use index t1_i3.
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT x IN (SELECT c FROM t1) FROM t2 }
 | |
| } {0 1}
 | |
| 
 | |
| do_test in3-3.5 {
 | |
|   # Numeric affinity should be applied to each side before the comparison
 | |
|   # takes place. Therefore we cannot use index t1_i1, which has no affinity.
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT y IN (SELECT a FROM t1) FROM t2 }
 | |
| } {1 1}
 | |
| do_test in3-3.6 {
 | |
|   # Numeric affinity is applied to both sides before 
 | |
|   # the comparison.  Therefore it is possible to use index t1_i2.
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT y IN (SELECT b FROM t1) FROM t2 }
 | |
| } {0 1}
 | |
| do_test in3-3.7 {
 | |
|   # Numeric affinity is applied before the comparison takes place. 
 | |
|   # Making it impossible to use index t1_i3.
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT y IN (SELECT c FROM t1) FROM t2 }
 | |
| } {1 1}
 | |
| 
 | |
| #---------------------------------------------------------------------
 | |
| #
 | |
| # Test using a multi-column index.
 | |
| #
 | |
| do_test in3-4.1 {
 | |
|   execsql {
 | |
|     CREATE TABLE t3(a, b, c);
 | |
|     CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t3_i ON t3(b, a);
 | |
|   }
 | |
| 
 | |
|   execsql {
 | |
|     INSERT INTO t3 VALUES(1, 'numeric', 2);
 | |
|     INSERT INTO t3 VALUES(2, 'text', 2);
 | |
|     INSERT INTO t3 VALUES(3, 'real', 2);
 | |
|     INSERT INTO t3 VALUES(4, 'none', 2);
 | |
|   }
 | |
| } {}
 | |
| do_test in3-4.2 {
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT 'text' IN (SELECT b FROM t3) }
 | |
| } {0 1}
 | |
| do_test in3-4.3 {
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT 'TEXT' COLLATE nocase IN (SELECT b FROM t3) }
 | |
| } {1 1}
 | |
| do_test in3-4.4 {
 | |
|   # A temp table must be used because t3_i.b is not guaranteed to be unique.
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT b FROM t3 WHERE b IN (SELECT b FROM t3) }
 | |
| } {1 none numeric real text}
 | |
| do_test in3-4.5 {
 | |
|   execsql { CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t3_i2 ON t3(b) }
 | |
|   exec_neph { SELECT b FROM t3 WHERE b IN (SELECT b FROM t3) }
 | |
| } {0 none numeric real text}
 | |
| do_test in3-4.6 {
 | |
|   execsql { DROP INDEX t3_i2 }
 | |
| } {}
 | |
| 
 | |
| # The following two test cases verify that ticket #2991 has been fixed.
 | |
| #
 | |
| do_test in3-5.1 {
 | |
|   execsql {
 | |
|     CREATE TABLE Folders(
 | |
|       folderid INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, 
 | |
|       parentid INTEGER, 
 | |
|       rootid INTEGER, 
 | |
|       path VARCHAR(255)
 | |
|     );
 | |
|   }
 | |
| } {}
 | |
| do_test in3-5.2 {
 | |
|   catchsql {
 | |
|     DELETE FROM Folders WHERE folderid IN
 | |
|     (SELECT folderid FROM Folder WHERE path LIKE 'C:\MP3\Albums\' || '%');
 | |
|   }
 | |
| } {1 {no such table: Folder}}
 | |
| 
 | |
| finish_test
 | 
