Hi! >From MySQL documentation: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.6/en/group-by-extensions.html
"MySQL extends the use of GROUP BY so that the select list can refer to nonaggregated columns not named in the GROUP BY clause. (...) However, this is useful primarily when all values in each nonaggregated column not named in the GROUP BY are the same for each group. The server is free to choose any value from each group, so unless they are the same, the values chosen are indeterminate." This is the reason why I think that the ONLY_FULL_GROUP_BY sql_mode flag should always be on. In your specific case, I note that album_id is not in GROUP BY and is not passed to any aggregating function (such as MAX()). Regards Federico -------------------------------------------- El vie, 23/5/14, Charles Cazabon <[email protected]> escribió: Asunto: [Maria-discuss] query result inconsistency between MariaDB 10.0.x and Oracle MySQL 5.1.x Para: "MariaDB discuss" <[email protected]> Fecha: viernes, 23 de mayo, 2014 20:18 Greetings, I recently upgraded the db server behind an application from MySQL 5.1.73 (as shipped in Ubuntu 10.04 "Lucid") to MariaDB 10.0.11 (from the MariaDB repo). A colleague of mine found an inconsistency between the results produced by the two servers for a given query. What we don't know is, is this a bug (I gather Maria is aiming at 100% compatibility), or is this somehow due to the query relying on unspecified behaviour (that the two db servers are therefore free to optimize differently)? The query is: SELECT t1.id, t2.album_id FROM t1 LEFT OUTER JOIN t2 ON t1.data_id = t2.id AND t1.event_type IN (1002, 1001, 1000) WHERE t1.event_type IN (1000, 1001, 1002, 1200, 1201, 1202, 1203) GROUP BY t1.id ORDER BY t1.id DESC LIMIT 0, 20; The MariaDB result looks like this: +-----+----------+ | id | album_id | +-----+----------+ | 623 | NULL | | 622 | NULL | | 621 | NULL | | 620 | NULL | | 619 | NULL | | 618 | NULL | | 617 | NULL | | 616 | NULL | | 615 | NULL | | 614 | NULL | | 613 | NULL | | 612 | 194 | | 611 | NULL | | 610 | NULL | | 609 | NULL | | 608 | 193 | | 607 | NULL | | 606 | NULL | | 605 | NULL | | 604 | NULL | +-----+----------+ And the Oracle MySQL result looks like this: +-----+----------+ | id | album_id | +-----+----------+ | 623 | NULL | | 622 | NULL | | 621 | NULL | | 620 | NULL | | 619 | NULL | | 618 | NULL | | 617 | NULL | | 616 | 196 |<-- different | 615 | NULL | | 614 | NULL | | 613 | NULL | | 612 | 194 | | 611 | 194 |<-- different | 610 | NULL | | 609 | NULL | | 608 | 193 | | 607 | 193 |<-- different | 606 | NULL | | 605 | NULL | | 604 | NULL | +-----+----------+ My colleague pointed out that if you EXPLAIN the queries, you can see that the two databases are interpreting the query differently -- see the "Extra" column. I can't paste the explain output here without using very long lines, so I've pastebinned it: http://pastebin.com/n2sbH0kY My colleague has made the data from these tables available here: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7755033/fatdrop/test_case_data.sql We've found workarounds for this, but we're really wondering if we've found a problem (either in MariaDB-MySQL consistency, or in the query, or ... ?). Any assistance appreciated. Charles -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Charles Cazabon <[email protected]> Software, consulting, and services available at http://pyropus.ca/ ------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
