[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16592?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ekaterina Dimitrova updated CASSANDRA-16592:
--------------------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 4.x
> The token function in where clause return incorrect data when using token
> equal condition and Specified a non-exist token value
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-16592
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16592
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Legacy/CQL
> Reporter: cimon
> Priority: Normal
> Fix For: 3.0.x, 3.11.x, 4.0.x, 4.x
>
>
> I get incorrect value when use query like 'select Token(pk1,pk2),pk1,pk2 from
> ks.table1 where token(pk1,pk2) = tokenValue'. The returned token value
> mismatch the where condition.
> This problem is reproduced in 3.11.3 and 4.0.
> Here is my schema and select statement
> {code:java}
> // schema
> cqlsh> desc testprefix.cprefix_03 ;CREATE TABLE testprefix.cprefix_03 (
> pk1 int,
> pk2 int,
> ck1 text,
> ck2 text,
> t1 int,
> PRIMARY KEY ((pk1, pk2), ck1, ck2)
> ) WITH CLUSTERING ORDER BY (ck1 ASC, ck2 ASC)
> AND additional_write_policy = '99p'
> AND bloom_filter_fp_chance = 0.01
> AND caching = {'keys': 'ALL', 'rows_per_partition': 'NONE'}
> AND cdc = false
> AND comment = ''
> AND compaction = {'class':
> 'org.apache.cassandra.db.compaction.SizeTieredCompactionStrategy',
> 'max_threshold': '32', 'min_threshold': '4'}
> AND compression = {'chunk_length_in_kb': '16', 'class':
> 'org.apache.cassandra.io.compress.LZ4Compressor'}
> AND crc_check_chance = 1.0
> AND default_time_to_live = 0
> AND extensions = {}
> AND gc_grace_seconds = 864000
> AND max_index_interval = 2048
> AND memtable_flush_period_in_ms = 0
> AND min_index_interval = 128
> AND read_repair = 'BLOCKING'
> AND speculative_retry = '99p';
> {code}
> execute cql query
> {code:java}
> // code placeholder
> cqlsh> SELECT Token(pk1,pk2), pk1,pk2 from testprefix.cprefix_03 WHERE
> token(pk1, pk2) =-9223372036854775808 LIMIT 2;
> system.token(pk1, pk2) | pk1 | pk2
> ------------------------+--------+---------
> -9222849988925915479 | 394560 | 3394560
> -9222849988925915479 | 394560 | 3394560
> (2 rows)
> cqlsh> SELECT Token(pk1,pk2) from testprefix.cprefix_03 where pk1 = 394560
> and pk2 = 3394560 LIMIT 2;
> system.token(pk1, pk2)
> ------------------------
> -9222849988925915479
> -9222849988925915479
> (2 rows)
> cqlsh> SELECT Token(pk1,pk2), pk1,pk2 from testprefix.cprefix_03 WHERE
> token(pk1, pk2) =-9222849988925915479 LIMIT 2;
> system.token(pk1, pk2) | pk1 | pk2
> ------------------------+--------+---------
> -9222849988925915479 | 394560 | 3394560
> -9222849988925915479 | 394560 | 3394560
> (2 rows){code}
> we can find that token value in the condition are inconsistent with the
> values in the result.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Then review the source code, to seek the anwser.
> {code:java}
> // code placeholder
> private static void addRange(SSTableReader sstable,
> AbstractBounds<PartitionPosition> requested,
> List<AbstractBounds<PartitionPosition>> boundsList)
> {
> if (requested instanceof Range && ((Range)requested).isWrapAround())
> // first condition
> {
> if (requested.right.compareTo(sstable.first) >= 0)
> {
> // since we wrap, we must contain the whole sstable prior to
> stopKey()
> Boundary<PartitionPosition> left = new
> Boundary<PartitionPosition>(sstable.first, true);
> Boundary<PartitionPosition> right;
> right = requested.rightBoundary();
> right = minRight(right, sstable.last, true);
> if (!isEmpty(left, right))
> boundsList.add(AbstractBounds.bounds(left, right));
> }
> if (requested.left.compareTo(sstable.last) <= 0)
> {
> // since we wrap, we must contain the whole sstable after
> dataRange.startKey()
> Boundary<PartitionPosition> right = new
> Boundary<PartitionPosition>(sstable.last, true);
> Boundary<PartitionPosition> left;
> left = requested.leftBoundary();
> left = maxLeft(left, sstable.first, true); // second condition
> if (!isEmpty(left, right))
> boundsList.add(AbstractBounds.bounds(left, right));
> }
> }
> else
> {
> assert requested.left.compareTo(requested.right) <= 0 ||
> requested.right.isMinimum();
> Boundary<PartitionPosition> left, right;
> left = requested.leftBoundary();
> right = requested.rightBoundary();
> left = maxLeft(left, sstable.first, true);
> // apparently isWrapAround() doesn't count Bounds that extend to the
> limit (min) as wrapping
> right = requested.right.isMinimum() ? new
> Boundary<PartitionPosition>(sstable.last, true)
> : minRight(right,
> sstable.last, true);
> if (!isEmpty(left, right))
> boundsList.add(AbstractBounds.bounds(left, right));
> }
> }
> {code}
> * we use token equal ,so isWrapAround is true.
> * requestd.left = requestd.right = -9223372036854775808,
> * the real sst dataBoundary.left = -9222849988925915479
> * so the maxLeft return the real dataBoudary.left. We get the incorrect data
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
