db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Matrigali <mikem_...@sbcglobal.net>
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-1109) lang/predicatePushdown.sql fails with wsdd5.6
Date Tue, 14 Mar 2006 01:41:02 GMT
Is there any hash joins in this plan? That is the standard reason to see 
different ordering on different jvm/machine if plans look the same.

A B (JIRA) wrote:
>     [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1109?page=comments#action_12370278 ]

> 
> A B commented on DERBY-1109:
> ----------------------------
> 
> This issue is the same as DERBY-1110--they both have the same query in them, and that
query is failing with the same row-ordering diff.
> 
> This diff is an interesting one: I've verified that for IBM wsdd the optimizer chooses
the same join order that it chooses for all other JVMs--which is expected since the derby.optimizer.noTimeout
flag is set to "true" for both lang/subquery.sql and lang/predicatePushdown.sql, and thus
the optimizer should always choose the same plan, regardless of machine/platform.
> 
> That said, I'm not sure what could be causing this specific difference in row ordering
for IBM wsdd.  I am able to reproduce the diff on my machine,  but don't understand where
it comes from.  Since the optimizer is choosing the same join order for all platforms, I was
assuming the row order should be the same, as well--but that's apparently not a safe assumption.
 I did notice that the queries that are failing have "DISTINCT" in them, so it's possible
that the ordering of rows based on a DISTINCT is JVM-dependent somehow, which would explain
this diff.
> 
> Can anyone confirm that one way or the other?
> 
> If this is just an _acceptable_ difference in JVM behavior, then there are two possible
solutions here: either 1) create a wsdd-specific master, or 2) (and probably more preferably)
add an "order by" clause to the queries in question to ensure that we get the same row order
across JVMs.
> 
> If, however, this difference in row order seems like incorrect behavior, then this would
of course merit further investigation.
> 
> Anyone have any input one way or the other?
> 
> 
>>lang/predicatePushdown.sql fails with wsdd5.6
>>---------------------------------------------
>>
>>         Key: DERBY-1109
>>         URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1109
>>     Project: Derby
>>        Type: Test
>>  Components: Regression Test Failure
>>    Versions: 10.2.0.0
>> Environment: IBM wsdd5.6 j9_13
>>    Reporter: Deepa Remesh
> 
> 
>>This test fails with the following diff:
>>7507a7508,7509
>>
>>>2          |1          
>>>4          |2          
>>
>>7509,7510d7510
>>< 4          |2          
>>< 2          |1          
>>7632a7633,7636
>>
>>>2          |1          
>>>2          |1          
>>>4          |2          
>>>4          |2          
>>
>>7635,7638d7638
>>< 4          |2          
>>< 4          |2          
>>< 2          |1          
>>< 2          |1     
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message