[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2194?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14735397#comment-14735397
]
James Taylor commented on PHOENIX-2194:
---------------------------------------
I suppose we could at a minimum we could update our eclipse defaults in
dev/eclipse_prefs_phoenix.epf and update that web page you mentioned.
Ideally, if we can change our pom somehow to enable assertions to be run in
Eclipse, that would be good (just don't know how to do this).
> 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)
