summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/test/autoindex3.test
blob: 3da7a70586e65fda42a4ebd61912d9201ed7f8db (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
# 2014-06-17
#
# 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 script is testing automatic index creation logic,
# and specifically that an automatic index will not be created that
# shadows a declared index.
#

set testdir [file dirname $argv0]
source $testdir/tester.tcl
set testprefix autoindex3

# The t1b and t2d indexes are not very selective.  It used to be that
# the autoindex mechanism would create automatic indexes on t1(b) or
# t2(d), make assumptions that they were reasonably selective, and use
# them instead of t1b or t2d.  But that would be cheating, because the
# automatic index cannot be any more selective than the real index.
#
# This test verifies that the cheat is no longer allowed.
#
do_execsql_test autoindex3-100 {
  CREATE TABLE t1(a,b,x);
  CREATE TABLE t2(c,d,y);
  CREATE INDEX t1b ON t1(b);
  CREATE INDEX t2d ON t2(d);
  ANALYZE sqlite_master;
  INSERT INTO sqlite_stat1 VALUES('t1','t1b','10000 500');
  INSERT INTO sqlite_stat1 VALUES('t2','t2d','10000 500');
  ANALYZE sqlite_master;
  EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN SELECT * FROM t1, t2 WHERE d=b;
} {~/AUTO/}

# Automatic indexes can still be used if existing indexes do not
# participate in == constraints.
#
do_execsql_test autoindex3-110 {
  EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN SELECT * FROM t1, t2 WHERE d>b AND x=y;
} {/AUTO/}
do_execsql_test autoindex3-120 {
  EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN SELECT * FROM t1, t2 WHERE d<b AND x=y;
} {/AUTO/}
do_execsql_test autoindex3-130 {
  EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN SELECT * FROM t1, t2 WHERE d IS NULL AND x=y;
} {/AUTO/}
do_execsql_test autoindex3-140 {
  EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN SELECT * FROM t1, t2 WHERE d IN (5,b) AND x=y;
} {/AUTO/}

reset_db
do_execsql_test 210 {
  CREATE TABLE v(b, d, e);
  CREATE TABLE u(a, b, c);
  ANALYZE sqlite_master;
  INSERT INTO "sqlite_stat1" VALUES('u','uab','40000 400 1');
  INSERT INTO "sqlite_stat1" VALUES('v','vbde','40000 400 1 1');
  INSERT INTO "sqlite_stat1" VALUES('v','ve','40000 21');

  CREATE INDEX uab on u(a, b);
  CREATE INDEX ve on v(e);
  CREATE INDEX vbde on v(b,d,e);

  DROP TABLE IF EXISTS sqlite_stat4;
  ANALYZE sqlite_master;
}

# At one point, SQLite was using the inferior plan:
#
#   0|0|1|SEARCH v USING INDEX ve (e>?)
#   0|1|0|SEARCH u USING COVERING INDEX uab (ANY(a) AND b=?)
#
# on the basis that the real index "uab" must be better than the automatic
# index. This is not right - a skip-scan is not necessarily better than an
# automatic index scan.
#
do_eqp_test 220 {
  select count(*) from u, v where u.b = v.b and v.e > 34;
} {
  QUERY PLAN
  |--SEARCH v USING INDEX ve (e>?)
  |--BLOOM FILTER ON u (b=?)
  `--SEARCH u USING AUTOMATIC COVERING INDEX (b=?)
}


finish_test