db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bryan Pendleton (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Assigned: (DERBY-1861) Column ordering ASSERT when combining column references and expressions in same ORDER BY
Date Sun, 24 Dec 2006 20:37:23 GMT
     [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1861?page=all ]

Bryan Pendleton reassigned DERBY-1861:
--------------------------------------

    Assignee: Bryan Pendleton

> Column ordering ASSERT when combining column references and expressions in same ORDER
BY
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-1861
>                 URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1861
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: SQL
>    Affects Versions: 10.3.0.0
>            Reporter: Bryan Pendleton
>         Assigned To: Bryan Pendleton
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: dataStructureNotes.html
>
>
> An ORDER BY clause wihch combines both column references and expressions causes the
> sort engine to throw an ASSERT failure in sane builds.
> Here's a repro script:
> -bash-2.05b$ java org.apache.derby.tools.ij
> ij version 10.3
> ij> connect 'jdbc:derby:brydb;create=true';
> ij> create table t (a int, b int, c int, d int);
> 0 rows inserted/updated/deleted
> ij> insert into t values (1, 2, 3, 4);
> 1 row inserted/updated/deleted
> ij> select * from t order by a, b, c+2;
> ERROR XJ001: Java exception: 'ASSERT FAILED column ordering error: org.apache.derby.shared.common.sanity.AssertFailure'.
> As a first theory to check, I believe that when columns in the ORDER BY clause go through
"pullup" processing,
> they are generated into the select statement's ResultColumnList and then are later removed
at bind time because
> they are determined to duplicate the columns implicitly selected by the "*" column list.
But the expression "c+2" is not
> removed from the result list because it does not duplicate any existing column in the
table. During this processing,
> I think that the field "addedColumnOffset" in class OrderByColumn is not managed correctly
and ends up generating
> a bogus column position for the "c+2" column (it doesn't reflect that pulled-up columns
"a" and "b" have disappeared
> from the ResultColumnList), causing the sanity assertion at execution time.
> I stumbled across this problem while writing regression tests for DERBY-147, but the
problem occurs
> with or without the DERBY-147 fix, so I decided to log it as a separate problem.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

Mime
View raw message