patched/test/orderby1.test

# 2012 Sept 27
#
# The author disclaims copyright to this source code.  In place of
# a legal notice, here is a blessing:
#
#    May you do good and not evil.
#    May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others.
#    May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
#
#***********************************************************************
# This file implements regression tests for SQLite library.  The
# focus of this file is testing that the optimizations that disable
# ORDER BY clauses when the natural order of a query is correct.
#


set testdir [file dirname $argv0]
source $testdir/tester.tcl
set ::testprefix orderby1

# Generate test data for a join.  Verify that the join gets the
# correct answer.
#
do_test 1.0 {
  db eval {
    BEGIN;
    CREATE TABLE album(
      aid INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
      title TEXT UNIQUE NOT NULL
    );
    CREATE TABLE track(
      tid INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
      aid INTEGER NOT NULL REFERENCES album,
      tn INTEGER NOT NULL,
      name TEXT,
      UNIQUE(aid, tn)
    );
    INSERT INTO album VALUES(1, '1-one'), (2, '2-two'), (3, '3-three');
    INSERT INTO track VALUES
        (NULL, 1, 1, 'one-a'),
        (NULL, 2, 2, 'two-b'),
        (NULL, 3, 3, 'three-c'),
        (NULL, 1, 3, 'one-c'),
        (NULL, 2, 1, 'two-a'),
        (NULL, 3, 1, 'three-a');
    COMMIT;
  }
} {}
do_test 1.1a {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn
  }
} {one-a one-c two-a two-b three-a three-c}

# Verify that the ORDER BY clause is optimized out
#
do_test 1.1b {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album CROSS JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn
  }
} {~/ORDER BY/}  ;# ORDER BY optimized out

# The same query with ORDER BY clause optimization disabled via + operators
# should give exactly the same answer.
#
do_test 1.2a {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY +title, +tn
  }
} {one-a one-c two-a two-b three-a three-c}

# The output is sorted manually in this case.
#
do_test 1.2b {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY +title, +tn
  }
} {/ORDER BY/}   ;# separate sorting pass due to "+" on ORDER BY terms

# The same query with ORDER BY optimizations turned off via built-in test.
#
do_test 1.3a {
  optimization_control db order-by-idx-join 0
  db cache flush
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn
  }
} {one-a one-c two-a two-b three-a three-c}
do_test 1.3b {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn
  }
} {/ORDER BY/}   ;# separate sorting pass due to disabled optimization
optimization_control db all 1
db cache flush

# Reverse order sorts
#
do_test 1.4a {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title DESC, tn
  }
} {three-a three-c two-a two-b one-a one-c}
do_test 1.4b {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY +title DESC, +tn
  }
} {three-a three-c two-a two-b one-a one-c}  ;# verify same order after sorting
do_test 1.4c {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title DESC, tn
  }
} {~/ORDER BY/}  ;# ORDER BY suppressed due to uniqueness constraints

do_test 1.5a {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn DESC
  }
} {one-c one-a two-b two-a three-c three-a}
do_test 1.5b {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY +title, +tn DESC
  }
} {one-c one-a two-b two-a three-c three-a}  ;# verify same order after sorting
do_test 1.5c {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn DESC
  }
} {~/ORDER BY/}  ;# ORDER BY suppressed due to uniqueness constraints

do_test 1.6a {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album CROSS JOIN track USING (aid)
     ORDER BY title DESC, tn DESC
  }
} {three-c three-a two-b two-a one-c one-a}
do_test 1.6b {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album CROSS JOIN track USING (aid)
     ORDER BY +title DESC, +tn DESC
  }
} {three-c three-a two-b two-a one-c one-a}  ;# verify same order after sorting
do_test 1.6c {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album CROSS JOIN track USING (aid)
     ORDER BY title DESC, tn DESC
  }
} {~/ORDER BY/}  ;# ORDER BY


# Reconstruct the test data to use indices rather than integer primary keys.
#
do_test 2.0 {
  db eval {
    BEGIN;
    DROP TABLE album;
    DROP TABLE track;
    CREATE TABLE album(
      aid INT PRIMARY KEY,
      title TEXT NOT NULL
    );
    CREATE INDEX album_i1 ON album(title, aid);
    CREATE TABLE track(
      aid INTEGER NOT NULL REFERENCES album,
      tn INTEGER NOT NULL,
      name TEXT,
      UNIQUE(aid, tn)
    );
    INSERT INTO album VALUES(1, '1-one'), (20, '2-two'), (3, '3-three');
    INSERT INTO track VALUES
        (1,  1, 'one-a'),
        (20, 2, 'two-b'),
        (3,  3, 'three-c'),
        (1,  3, 'one-c'),
        (20, 1, 'two-a'),
        (3,  1, 'three-a');
    COMMIT;
  }
} {}
do_test 2.1a {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn
  }
} {one-a one-c two-a two-b three-a three-c}

# Verify that the ORDER BY clause is optimized out
#
do_test 2.1b {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn
  }
} {/ORDER BY/}  ;# ORDER BY required because of missing aid term in ORDER BY

do_test 2.1c {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, aid, tn
  }
} {one-a one-c two-a two-b three-a three-c}
do_test 2.1d {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, aid, tn
  }
} {/ORDER BY/}  ;# ORDER BY required in this case

# The same query with ORDER BY clause optimization disabled via + operators
# should give exactly the same answer.
#
do_test 2.2a {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY +title, +tn
  }
} {one-a one-c two-a two-b three-a three-c}

# The output is sorted manually in this case.
#
do_test 2.2b {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY +title, +tn
  }
} {/ORDER BY/}   ;# separate sorting pass due to "+" on ORDER BY terms

# The same query with ORDER BY optimizations turned off via built-in test.
#
do_test 2.3a {
  optimization_control db order-by-idx-join 0
  db cache flush
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn
  }
} {one-a one-c two-a two-b three-a three-c}
do_test 2.3b {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn
  }
} {/ORDER BY/}   ;# separate sorting pass due to disabled optimization
optimization_control db all 1
db cache flush

# Reverse order sorts
#
do_test 2.4a {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title DESC, tn
  }
} {three-a three-c two-a two-b one-a one-c}
do_test 2.4b {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY +title DESC, +tn
  }
} {three-a three-c two-a two-b one-a one-c}  ;# verify same order after sorting
do_test 2.4c {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title DESC, tn
  }
} {/ORDER BY/}  ;# separate sorting pass due to mixed DESC/ASC


do_test 2.5a {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn DESC
  }
} {one-c one-a two-b two-a three-c three-a}
do_test 2.5b {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY +title, +tn DESC
  }
} {one-c one-a two-b two-a three-c three-a}  ;# verify same order after sorting
do_test 2.5c {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn DESC
  }
} {/ORDER BY/}  ;# separate sorting pass due to mixed ASC/DESC

do_test 2.6a {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title DESC, tn DESC
  }
} {three-c three-a two-b two-a one-c one-a}
do_test 2.6b {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY +title DESC, +tn DESC
  }
} {three-c three-a two-b two-a one-c one-a}  ;# verify same order after sorting
do_test 2.6c {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title DESC, tn DESC
  }
} {/ORDER BY/}  ;# ORDER BY required


# Generate another test dataset, but this time using mixed ASC/DESC indices.
#
do_test 3.0 {
  db eval {
    BEGIN;
    DROP TABLE album;
    DROP TABLE track;
    CREATE TABLE album(
      aid INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
      title TEXT UNIQUE NOT NULL
    );
    CREATE TABLE track(
      tid INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
      aid INTEGER NOT NULL REFERENCES album,
      tn INTEGER NOT NULL,
      name TEXT,
      UNIQUE(aid ASC, tn DESC)
    );
    INSERT INTO album VALUES(1, '1-one'), (2, '2-two'), (3, '3-three');
    INSERT INTO track VALUES
        (NULL, 1, 1, 'one-a'),
        (NULL, 2, 2, 'two-b'),
        (NULL, 3, 3, 'three-c'),
        (NULL, 1, 3, 'one-c'),
        (NULL, 2, 1, 'two-a'),
        (NULL, 3, 1, 'three-a');
    COMMIT;
  }
} {}
do_test 3.1a {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album CROSS JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn DESC
  }
} {one-c one-a two-b two-a three-c three-a}

# Verify that the ORDER BY clause is optimized out
#
do_test 3.1b {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album CROSS JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn DESC
  }
} {~/ORDER BY/}  ;# ORDER BY optimized out

# The same query with ORDER BY clause optimization disabled via + operators
# should give exactly the same answer.
#
do_test 3.2a {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY +title, +tn DESC
  }
} {one-c one-a two-b two-a three-c three-a}

# The output is sorted manually in this case.
#
do_test 3.2b {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY +title, +tn DESC
  }
} {/ORDER BY/}   ;# separate sorting pass due to "+" on ORDER BY terms

# The same query with ORDER BY optimizations turned off via built-in test.
#
do_test 3.3a {
  optimization_control db order-by-idx-join 0
  db cache flush
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn DESC
  }
} {one-c one-a two-b two-a three-c three-a}
do_test 3.3b {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn DESC
  }
} {/ORDER BY/}   ;# separate sorting pass due to disabled optimization
optimization_control db all 1
db cache flush

# Without the mixed ASC/DESC on ORDER BY
#
do_test 3.4a {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn
  }
} {one-a one-c two-a two-b three-a three-c}
do_test 3.4b {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY +title, +tn
  }
} {one-a one-c two-a two-b three-a three-c}  ;# verify same order after sorting
do_test 3.4c {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title, tn
  }
} {~/ORDER BY/}  ;# ORDER BY suppressed by uniqueness constraints

do_test 3.5a {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title DESC, tn DESC
  }
} {three-c three-a two-b two-a one-c one-a}
do_test 3.5b {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY +title DESC, +tn DESC
  }
} {three-c three-a two-b two-a one-c one-a}  ;# verify same order after sorting
do_test 3.5c {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title DESC, tn DESC
  }
} {~/ORDER BY/}  ;# ORDER BY suppressed by uniqueness constraints


do_test 3.6a {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album CROSS JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title DESC, tn
  }
} {three-a three-c two-a two-b one-a one-c}
do_test 3.6b {
  db eval {
    SELECT name FROM album CROSS JOIN track USING (aid)
     ORDER BY +title DESC, +tn
  }
} {three-a three-c two-a two-b one-a one-c}  ;# verify same order after sorting
do_test 3.6c {
  db eval {
    EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
    SELECT name FROM album CROSS JOIN track USING (aid) ORDER BY title DESC, tn
  }
} {~/ORDER BY/}  ;# inverted ASC/DESC is optimized out

# Ticket 5ed1772895bf3deeab78c5e3519b1da9165c541b (2013-06-04)
# Incorrect ORDER BY on an indexed JOIN
#
do_test 4.0 {
  db eval {
    CREATE TABLE t41(a INT UNIQUE NOT NULL, b INT NOT NULL);
    CREATE INDEX t41ba ON t41(b,a);
    CREATE TABLE t42(x INT NOT NULL REFERENCES t41(a), y INT NOT NULL);
    CREATE UNIQUE INDEX t42xy ON t42(x,y);
    INSERT INTO t41 VALUES(1,1),(3,1);
    INSERT INTO t42 VALUES(1,13),(1,15),(3,14),(3,16);

    SELECT b, y FROM t41 CROSS JOIN t42 ON x=a ORDER BY b, y;
  }
} {1 13 1 14 1 15 1 16}

# No sorting of queries that omit the FROM clause.
#
do_eqp_test 5.0 {
  SELECT 5 ORDER BY 1
} {
  QUERY PLAN
  `--SCAN CONSTANT ROW
}
do_execsql_test 5.1 {
  EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN SELECT 5 UNION ALL SELECT 3 ORDER BY 1
} {~/B-TREE/}
do_execsql_test 5.2 {
  SELECT 5 UNION ALL SELECT 3 ORDER BY 1
} {3 5}
do_execsql_test 5.3 {
  SELECT 986 AS x GROUP BY X ORDER BY X
} {986}

# The following test (originally derived from a single test within fuzz.test)
# verifies that a PseudoTable cursor is not closed prematurely in a deeply
# nested query.  This test caused a segfault on 3.8.5 beta.
#
do_execsql_test 6.0 {
  CREATE TABLE abc(a, b, c);
  INSERT INTO abc VALUES(1, 2, 3);
  INSERT INTO abc VALUES(4, 5, 6);
  INSERT INTO abc VALUES(7, 8, 9);
  SELECT (
    SELECT 'hardware' FROM (
      SELECT 'software' ORDER BY 'firmware' ASC, 'sportswear' DESC
    ) GROUP BY 1 HAVING length(b)
  )
  FROM abc;
} {hardware hardware hardware}

# Here is a test for a query-planner problem reported on the SQLite
# mailing list on 2014-09-18 by "Merike".  Beginning with version 3.8.0,
# a separate sort was being used rather than using the single-column
# index.  This was due to an oversight in the indexMightHelpWithOrderby()
# routine in where.c.
#
do_execsql_test 7.0 {
  CREATE TABLE t7(a,b);
  CREATE INDEX t7a ON t7(a);
  CREATE INDEX t7ab ON t7(a,b);
  EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN
  SELECT * FROM t7 WHERE a=?1 ORDER BY rowid;
} {~/ORDER BY/}

#-------------------------------------------------------------------------
# Test a partial sort large enough to cause the sorter to spill data
# to disk.
#
reset_db
do_execsql_test 8.0 {
  PRAGMA cache_size = 5;
  CREATE TABLE t1(a, b);
  CREATE INDEX i1 ON t1(a);
}

do_eqp_test 8.1 {
  SELECT * FROM t1 ORDER BY a, b;
} {
  QUERY PLAN
  |--SCAN TABLE t1 USING INDEX i1
  `--USE TEMP B-TREE FOR RIGHT PART OF ORDER BY
}

do_execsql_test 8.2 {
  WITH cnt(i) AS (
    SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT i+1 FROM cnt WHERE i<10000
  )
  INSERT INTO t1 SELECT i%2, randomblob(500) FROM cnt;
}

do_test 8.3 {
  db eval { SELECT * FROM t1 ORDER BY a, b } { incr res $a }
  set res
} 5000

#---------------------------------------------------------------------------
# https://www.sqlite.org/src/tktview/cb3aa0641d9a413841c004293a4fc06cdc122029
#
# Adverse interaction between scalar subqueries and the partial-sorting
# logic.
#
do_execsql_test 9.0 {
  DROP TABLE IF EXISTS t1;
  CREATE TABLE t1(x INTEGER PRIMARY KEY);
  INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(1),(2);
  DROP TABLE IF EXISTS t2;
  CREATE TABLE t2(y);
  INSERT INTO t2 VALUES(9),(8),(3),(4);
  SELECT (SELECT x||y FROM t2, t1 ORDER BY x, y);
} {13}

# Problem found by OSSFuzz on 2018-05-05.  This was caused by a new
# optimization that had not been previously released.
#
do_execsql_test 10.0 {
  CREATE TABLE t10(a,b);
  INSERT INTO t10 VALUES(1,2),(8,9),(3,4),(5,4),(0,7);
  CREATE INDEX t10b ON t10(b);
  SELECT b, rowid, '^' FROM t10 ORDER BY b, a LIMIT 4;
} {2 1 ^ 4 3 ^ 4 4 ^ 7 5 ^}


finish_test