diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'src/test/regress/sql/select.sql')
-rw-r--r-- | src/test/regress/sql/select.sql | 269 |
1 files changed, 269 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/src/test/regress/sql/select.sql b/src/test/regress/sql/select.sql new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d6f42aa --- /dev/null +++ b/src/test/regress/sql/select.sql @@ -0,0 +1,269 @@ +-- +-- SELECT +-- + +-- btree index +-- awk '{if($1<10){print;}else{next;}}' onek.data | sort +0n -1 +-- +SELECT * FROM onek + WHERE onek.unique1 < 10 + ORDER BY onek.unique1; + +-- +-- awk '{if($1<20){print $1,$14;}else{next;}}' onek.data | sort +0nr -1 +-- +SELECT onek.unique1, onek.stringu1 FROM onek + WHERE onek.unique1 < 20 + ORDER BY unique1 using >; + +-- +-- awk '{if($1>980){print $1,$14;}else{next;}}' onek.data | sort +1d -2 +-- +SELECT onek.unique1, onek.stringu1 FROM onek + WHERE onek.unique1 > 980 + ORDER BY stringu1 using <; + +-- +-- awk '{if($1>980){print $1,$16;}else{next;}}' onek.data | +-- sort +1d -2 +0nr -1 +-- +SELECT onek.unique1, onek.string4 FROM onek + WHERE onek.unique1 > 980 + ORDER BY string4 using <, unique1 using >; + +-- +-- awk '{if($1>980){print $1,$16;}else{next;}}' onek.data | +-- sort +1dr -2 +0n -1 +-- +SELECT onek.unique1, onek.string4 FROM onek + WHERE onek.unique1 > 980 + ORDER BY string4 using >, unique1 using <; + +-- +-- awk '{if($1<20){print $1,$16;}else{next;}}' onek.data | +-- sort +0nr -1 +1d -2 +-- +SELECT onek.unique1, onek.string4 FROM onek + WHERE onek.unique1 < 20 + ORDER BY unique1 using >, string4 using <; + +-- +-- awk '{if($1<20){print $1,$16;}else{next;}}' onek.data | +-- sort +0n -1 +1dr -2 +-- +SELECT onek.unique1, onek.string4 FROM onek + WHERE onek.unique1 < 20 + ORDER BY unique1 using <, string4 using >; + +-- +-- test partial btree indexes +-- +-- As of 7.2, planner probably won't pick an indexscan without stats, +-- so ANALYZE first. Also, we want to prevent it from picking a bitmapscan +-- followed by sort, because that could hide index ordering problems. +-- +ANALYZE onek2; + +SET enable_seqscan TO off; +SET enable_bitmapscan TO off; +SET enable_sort TO off; + +-- +-- awk '{if($1<10){print $0;}else{next;}}' onek.data | sort +0n -1 +-- +SELECT onek2.* FROM onek2 WHERE onek2.unique1 < 10; + +-- +-- awk '{if($1<20){print $1,$14;}else{next;}}' onek.data | sort +0nr -1 +-- +SELECT onek2.unique1, onek2.stringu1 FROM onek2 + WHERE onek2.unique1 < 20 + ORDER BY unique1 using >; + +-- +-- awk '{if($1>980){print $1,$14;}else{next;}}' onek.data | sort +1d -2 +-- +SELECT onek2.unique1, onek2.stringu1 FROM onek2 + WHERE onek2.unique1 > 980; + +RESET enable_seqscan; +RESET enable_bitmapscan; +RESET enable_sort; + + +SELECT two, stringu1, ten, string4 + INTO TABLE tmp + FROM onek; + +-- +-- awk '{print $1,$2;}' person.data | +-- awk '{if(NF!=2){print $3,$2;}else{print;}}' - emp.data | +-- awk '{if(NF!=2){print $3,$2;}else{print;}}' - student.data | +-- awk 'BEGIN{FS=" ";}{if(NF!=2){print $4,$5;}else{print;}}' - stud_emp.data +-- +-- SELECT name, age FROM person*; ??? check if different +SELECT p.name, p.age FROM person* p; + +-- +-- awk '{print $1,$2;}' person.data | +-- awk '{if(NF!=2){print $3,$2;}else{print;}}' - emp.data | +-- awk '{if(NF!=2){print $3,$2;}else{print;}}' - student.data | +-- awk 'BEGIN{FS=" ";}{if(NF!=1){print $4,$5;}else{print;}}' - stud_emp.data | +-- sort +1nr -2 +-- +SELECT p.name, p.age FROM person* p ORDER BY age using >, name; + +-- +-- Test some cases involving whole-row Var referencing a subquery +-- +select foo from (select 1 offset 0) as foo; +select foo from (select null offset 0) as foo; +select foo from (select 'xyzzy',1,null offset 0) as foo; + +-- +-- Test VALUES lists +-- +select * from onek, (values(147, 'RFAAAA'), (931, 'VJAAAA')) as v (i, j) + WHERE onek.unique1 = v.i and onek.stringu1 = v.j; + +-- a more complex case +-- looks like we're coding lisp :-) +select * from onek, + (values ((select i from + (values(10000), (2), (389), (1000), (2000), ((select 10029))) as foo(i) + order by i asc limit 1))) bar (i) + where onek.unique1 = bar.i; + +-- try VALUES in a subquery +select * from onek + where (unique1,ten) in (values (1,1), (20,0), (99,9), (17,99)) + order by unique1; + +-- VALUES is also legal as a standalone query or a set-operation member +VALUES (1,2), (3,4+4), (7,77.7); + +VALUES (1,2), (3,4+4), (7,77.7) +UNION ALL +SELECT 2+2, 57 +UNION ALL +TABLE int8_tbl; + +-- corner case: VALUES with no columns +CREATE TEMP TABLE nocols(); +INSERT INTO nocols DEFAULT VALUES; +SELECT * FROM nocols n, LATERAL (VALUES(n.*)) v; + +-- +-- Test ORDER BY options +-- + +CREATE TEMP TABLE foo (f1 int); + +INSERT INTO foo VALUES (42),(3),(10),(7),(null),(null),(1); + +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1; +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 ASC; -- same thing +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 NULLS FIRST; +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 DESC; +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 DESC NULLS LAST; + +-- check if indexscans do the right things +CREATE INDEX fooi ON foo (f1); +SET enable_sort = false; + +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1; +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 NULLS FIRST; +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 DESC; +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 DESC NULLS LAST; + +DROP INDEX fooi; +CREATE INDEX fooi ON foo (f1 DESC); + +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1; +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 NULLS FIRST; +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 DESC; +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 DESC NULLS LAST; + +DROP INDEX fooi; +CREATE INDEX fooi ON foo (f1 DESC NULLS LAST); + +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1; +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 NULLS FIRST; +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 DESC; +SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 DESC NULLS LAST; + +-- +-- Test planning of some cases with partial indexes +-- + +-- partial index is usable +explain (costs off) +select * from onek2 where unique2 = 11 and stringu1 = 'ATAAAA'; +select * from onek2 where unique2 = 11 and stringu1 = 'ATAAAA'; +-- actually run the query with an analyze to use the partial index +explain (costs off, analyze on, timing off, summary off) +select * from onek2 where unique2 = 11 and stringu1 = 'ATAAAA'; +explain (costs off) +select unique2 from onek2 where unique2 = 11 and stringu1 = 'ATAAAA'; +select unique2 from onek2 where unique2 = 11 and stringu1 = 'ATAAAA'; +-- partial index predicate implies clause, so no need for retest +explain (costs off) +select * from onek2 where unique2 = 11 and stringu1 < 'B'; +select * from onek2 where unique2 = 11 and stringu1 < 'B'; +explain (costs off) +select unique2 from onek2 where unique2 = 11 and stringu1 < 'B'; +select unique2 from onek2 where unique2 = 11 and stringu1 < 'B'; +-- but if it's an update target, must retest anyway +explain (costs off) +select unique2 from onek2 where unique2 = 11 and stringu1 < 'B' for update; +select unique2 from onek2 where unique2 = 11 and stringu1 < 'B' for update; +-- partial index is not applicable +explain (costs off) +select unique2 from onek2 where unique2 = 11 and stringu1 < 'C'; +select unique2 from onek2 where unique2 = 11 and stringu1 < 'C'; +-- partial index implies clause, but bitmap scan must recheck predicate anyway +SET enable_indexscan TO off; +explain (costs off) +select unique2 from onek2 where unique2 = 11 and stringu1 < 'B'; +select unique2 from onek2 where unique2 = 11 and stringu1 < 'B'; +RESET enable_indexscan; +-- check multi-index cases too +explain (costs off) +select unique1, unique2 from onek2 + where (unique2 = 11 or unique1 = 0) and stringu1 < 'B'; +select unique1, unique2 from onek2 + where (unique2 = 11 or unique1 = 0) and stringu1 < 'B'; +explain (costs off) +select unique1, unique2 from onek2 + where (unique2 = 11 and stringu1 < 'B') or unique1 = 0; +select unique1, unique2 from onek2 + where (unique2 = 11 and stringu1 < 'B') or unique1 = 0; + +-- +-- Test some corner cases that have been known to confuse the planner +-- + +-- ORDER BY on a constant doesn't really need any sorting +SELECT 1 AS x ORDER BY x; + +-- But ORDER BY on a set-valued expression does +create function sillysrf(int) returns setof int as + 'values (1),(10),(2),($1)' language sql immutable; + +select sillysrf(42); +select sillysrf(-1) order by 1; + +drop function sillysrf(int); + +-- X = X isn't a no-op, it's effectively X IS NOT NULL assuming = is strict +-- (see bug #5084) +select * from (values (2),(null),(1)) v(k) where k = k order by k; +select * from (values (2),(null),(1)) v(k) where k = k; + +-- Test partitioned tables with no partitions, which should be handled the +-- same as the non-inheritance case when expanding its RTE. +create table list_parted_tbl (a int,b int) partition by list (a); +create table list_parted_tbl1 partition of list_parted_tbl + for values in (1) partition by list(b); +explain (costs off) select * from list_parted_tbl; +drop table list_parted_tbl; |