db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mike Matrigali (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Updated: (DERBY-2212) Add "Unique where not null" to create index
Date Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:08:50 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2212?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Mike Matrigali updated DERBY-2212:
----------------------------------


I continue to think that it is a bad idea to introduce duplicate values to the current btree
unique index (and sorting paradigm).  I guess you are building a "mostly" uniquei index. 
I understand that SQL wants to treat the nulls differently but the basic assumptions of a
lot of the structure of the unique btree (splitting, searching, logical recovery, branch node
keys, 
serializable locking, ....) all are based on actual lower level physical nature of the keys.
 

For instance while the SQL layer may never do a search where key=null, the logical recovery
code may execute a search on the unique index using the key expecting null to
match null.   So if index
is a single column unique index, with say 1,000,000 null values we may issue a search
in the unique index for "null" assuming we will find the single row because it is a unique
index.  I believe the current search algorithm is optimized for unique indexes to not include
the row location column in the search comparisons.

 Introducing duplicate nulls to unique indexes I believe will unnecessarily complicate the
code and likely introduce bugs which will be hard to identify in the future.

Safest would be to use existing non-unique indexes with extra work by language layer to 
verify uniqueness at insert time (indexes don't support updates so they default to a delete
and
insert -- thus just one path to code/check).  It may be worth fiddling with the optimizer
to recognize that this index is a "mostly unique non-unique index" so that it can get estimates
better than a regular non-unique index.  

Adding support to the btree itself to perform the check at insert time is more efficient at
the cost of complicating the btree code, but I think could be isolated to a single compare
call at point just before value is about to be inserted into tree.  

I know it is enticing to use the unique tree, but just sometimes treat nulls as not equal
and sometimes as equal - but i don't think that is the right approach.

> Add "Unique where not null" to create index
> -------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-2212
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2212
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: SQL
>    Affects Versions: 10.2.1.6
>            Reporter: Oleksandr Alesinskyy
>            Assignee: Anurag Shekhar
>         Attachments: derby-2212preview.diff, derby-2212preview2.diff
>
>
> Derby prohibits creation of unique constraints on nullable colums (as well if only some
columns in the constraint list are nullable) and treat nulls in unique indexes as normal values
(i.e. only one row with null values in indexed columns may be inserted into the table). This
bahavior is very restrictive, does not completely comply with SQL standards (both letter and
intent) as well as with business needs and intending meaning of NULL values (2 null values
are not considered as equal, this comparision shall return NULL, and for selection criteria
boolean null is treated as FALSE).
> This behavior, as far as I can see, is modelled after DB2 (and differs from behavior
of most other major databases, like SyBase, Oracle, etc.).
> But even DB2 provide some means to alleviate these restrictions, namely "UNIQUE WHERE
NOT NULL" clause for CREATE INDEX statement.
> It will be very good if such "UNIQUE WHERE NOT NULL" clause will be introduced in Derby.
> Regards,
> Oleksandr Alesinskyy

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


Mime
View raw message