List:Falcon Storage Engine« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Lars-Erik Bjørk Date:April 29 2009 9:02pm
Subject:Re: max() and min()
View as plain text  
On Apr 29, 2009, at 4:50 PM, Kevin Lewis wrote:

> Lars-Erik,
> 43668 was re-triages yesterday and assigned to Igor as lead.  I just  
> changed 43669 to Server:Types also and set it to be re-triaged.   
> This is a problem for the server folks to solve since the server  
> gets the wrong answer on InnoDB and MyISAM if there is no index. It  
> needs to be able to handle '02'.   Thanks for looking into this.

Thanks Kevin!

That was my plan too, I agree that the formatting is a server problem,  
I just wanted to be sure that we did not miss to use the index when we  
were supposed to.

> Kevin
> Lars-Erik Bjørk wrote:
>> Hi all!
>> Does anyone know how the server decided witch technique to use to  
>> get the max() min() values from the engine? (select max(c1) from t1)
>> I have looked briefly at bugs
>> * #43668 Falcon returns wrong MAX() value with year(2) type
>> * #43669 Falcon returns diff. no of digits than other engines with  
>> MIN() for YEAR values
>> I have concluded that bug#43668 is a server bug. MyISAM and InnoDB  
>> implements a handler function called ::index_last that finds the  
>> last value in the index directly, and therefore the engines only  
>> return one row to the server. Falcon does not implement this, and  
>> does not use the index and returns all the rows to the server. The  
>> server then makes the wrong decision on which YEAR-value that is  
>> the biggest. I have confirmed this by testing for the other engines  
>> without having an index on the YEAR field, in which case we also  
>> get the wrong result. (f. ex 99 > 01).
>> Bug#43669 is less important. Falcon returns different number of  
>> digits when asked for the min() value. F. ex InnoDB and MyISAM  
>> returns '2', whereas Falcon returns '02'. The same case is  
>> happening here, the index is used by the other engines, but not by  
>> Falcon. If we don't use an index for the other engines either, they  
>> also return the "wrong" number of digits.
>> The strange thing here is that Falcon seems to implement the  
>> handler functions used by the other engines, i.e ::index_first, so  
>> I am not sure why the index is not used here.
>> Does anyone know how the server asks Falcon which technique to use?  
>> Is there some flag returned by Falcon for this? Does the same flag  
>> cover both max() and min()?
>> Best,
>> Lars-Erik

max() and min()Lars-Erik Bjørk29 Apr
  • Re: max() and min()Kevin Lewis29 Apr
    • Re: max() and min()Lars-Erik Bjørk29 Apr