[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2194?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14735366#comment-14735366
]
James Taylor commented on PHOENIX-2194:
---------------------------------------
Good point, [~samarthjain]. There's a bit of a history behind this one. In pre
0.98 HBase, if this assert didn't pass, the scan would get in an infinite loop.
This isn't the case anymore (HBase would just move on to the next cell
instead). However, we still want to be warned if this occurs, as it means
there's a bug in our skip scan. I'll add a log.warn for this too, but I like
the assert as it causes our unit tests to fail (while a log message would most
likely be ignored).
Do you think we're ok with the assert and a log.warning?
> order by should not require all PK fields with = constraint
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: PHOENIX-2194
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2194
> Project: Phoenix
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 4.5.0
> Environment: linux
> Reporter: Gary Horen
> Assignee: James Taylor
> Labels: AtMention, SFDC
> Fix For: 4.6, 4.5.2
>
> Attachments: PHOENIX-2194-tests.patch, PHOENIX-2194-tests2.patch,
> PHOENIX-2194.patch, PHOENIX-2194_master.patch, PHOENIX-2194_master.patch,
> PHOENIX-2194_v2.patch, PHOENIX-2194_v3.patch, PHOENIX-2194_v4.patch,
> PHOENIX-2194_v5.patch, PHOENIX-2194_v6.patch
>
>
> Here is a table:
> CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS FEEDS.STUFF
> (
> STUFF CHAR(15) NOT NULL,
> NONSENSE CHAR(15) NOT NULL
> CONSTRAINT PK PRIMARY KEY
> (
> STUFF,
> NONSENSE
>
> )
> ) VERSIONS=1,MULTI_TENANT=TRUE,REPLICATION_SCOPE=1
> Here is a query:
> explain SELECT * FROM feeds.stuff
> where stuff = ' '
> and nonsense > ' '
> order by nonsense
> Here is the plan:
> CLIENT 1-CHUNK PARALLEL 1-WAY RANGE SCAN
> SERVER FILTER BY FIRST KEY ONLY
> SERVER TOP 100 ROWS SORTED BY [NONSE
> CLIENT MERGE SORT
> If I change to ORDER BY STUFF, NONSENSE I get:
> CLIENT 1-CHUNK SERIAL 1-WAY RANGE SCAN O
> SERVER FILTER BY FIRST KEY ONLY AND
> SERVER 100 ROW LIMIT
> CLIENT 100 ROW LIMIT
> Since the leading constraint is =, ORDER BY will be unaffected by it, so
> ORDER BY should not need the leading constraint; it should only require the
> columns whose values would vary (which, since they are ordered by the key,
> should (and do) result in the client side sort being optimized out.) Having
> to include the leading = constraints in the ORDER BY clause is very
> counter-intuitive.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
