Bug #30355: Incorrect ordering of UDF results
There's currently no way of knowing the determinicity of an UDF. And the optimizer and the sequence() UDFs were making wrong assumptions about what the is_const member means. Plus there was no implementation of update_system_tables() causing the optimizer to overwrite the information returned by the <udf>_init function. Fixed by equating the assumptions about the semantics of is_const and providing a implementation of update_used_tables(). Added a TODO item for the UDF API change needed to make a better implementation.
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment