1. 29 Aug, 2007 2 commits
  2. 28 Aug, 2007 2 commits
    • davi@moksha.local's avatar
      Merge bk-internal.mysql.com:/home/bk/mysql-5.0-runtime · 74fcc760
      davi@moksha.local authored
      into  moksha.local:/Users/davi/mysql/push/mysql-5.0-runtime
      74fcc760
    • malff/marcsql@weblab.(none)'s avatar
      Bug#30625 (Performance, reduce depth for expressions) · ec9b9a98
      malff/marcsql@weblab.(none) authored
      This is a performance bug, affecting in particular the bison generated code
      for the parser.
      
      Prior to this fix, the grammar used a long chain of reduces to parse an
      expression, like:
        bit_expr -> bit_term
        bit_term -> bit_factor
        bit_factor -> value_expr
        value_expr -> term
        term -> factor
      etc
      
      This chain of reduces cause the internal state automaton in the generated
      parser to execute more state transitions and more reduces, so that the
      generated MySQLParse() function would spend a lot of time looping to execute
      all the grammar reductions.
      
      With this patch, the grammar has been reorganized so that rules are more
      "flat", limiting the depth of reduces needed to parse <expr>.
      
      Tests have been written to enforce that relative priorities and properties
      of operators have not changed while changing the grammar.
      
      See the bug report for performance data.
      ec9b9a98
  3. 27 Aug, 2007 2 commits
    • davi@moksha.local's avatar
      Bug#30632 HANDLER read failure causes hang · 77d78a88
      davi@moksha.local authored
      If, after the tables are locked, one of the conditions to read from a
      HANDLER table is not met, the handler code wrongly jumps to a error path
      that won't unlock the tables.
      
      The user-visible effect is that after a error in a handler read command,
      all subsequent handler operations on the same table will hang.
      
      The fix is simply to correct the code to jump to the (same) error path that
      unlocks the tables.
      77d78a88
    • davi@moksha.local's avatar
      Bug#25164 create table `a` as select * from `A` hangs · 91e1cc21
      davi@moksha.local authored
      The problem from a user's perspective: user creates table A, and then tries
      to CREATE TABLE a SELECT from A - and this causes a deadlock error, a hang,
      or fails with a debug assert, but only if the storage engine is InnoDB.
      
      The origin of the problem: InnoDB uses case-insensitive collation
      (system_charset_info) when looking up the internal table share, thus returning
      the same share for 'a' and 'A'.
      
      Cause of the user-visible behavior: since the same share is returned to SQL
      locking subsystem, it assumes that the same table is first locked (within the
      same session) for WRITE, and then for READ, and returns a deadlock error.
      However, the code is wrong in not properly cleaning up upon an error, leaving
      external locks in place, which leads to assertion failures and hangs.
      
      Fix that has been implemented: the SQL layer should properly propagate the
      deadlock error, cleaning up and freeing all resources.
      
      Further work towards a more complete solution: InnoDB should not use case
      insensitive collation for table share hash if table names on disk honor the case.
      91e1cc21
  4. 23 Aug, 2007 1 commit
    • malff/marcsql@weblab.(none)'s avatar
      Do not use $static_link for GCOV builds, · 7a1942d2
      malff/marcsql@weblab.(none) authored
      since this flag was explicitly removed in pushbuild for GCOV builds.
      
       BUILD_CMD => ['sh', '-c', 'perl -i.bak -pe "s/ \\\\\$static_link//" ' .
                    'BUILD/compile-pentium-gcov; BUILD/compile-pentium-gcov'],
      
      Moving $static_link to SETUP.sh broke this, and is now fixed.
      
      Should this flag be needed on some platforms,
      the proper location is compile-<platform>-gcov
      
      Tested the amd64 and pentium64 build fine without it, and can run NDB tests.
      7a1942d2
  5. 22 Aug, 2007 4 commits
    • malff/marcsql@weblab.(none)'s avatar
      Merge malff@bk-internal.mysql.com:/home/bk/mysql-5.0-runtime · c70ffc31
      malff/marcsql@weblab.(none) authored
      into  weblab.(none):/home/marcsql/TREE/mysql-5.0-30237
      c70ffc31
    • malff/marcsql@weblab.(none)'s avatar
      Merge malff@bk-internal.mysql.com:/home/bk/mysql-5.0-runtime · 421ba84c
      malff/marcsql@weblab.(none) authored
      into  weblab.(none):/home/marcsql/TREE/mysql-5.0-23062
      421ba84c
    • malff/marcsql@weblab.(none)'s avatar
      Merge malff@bk-internal.mysql.com:/home/bk/mysql-5.0-runtime · ecea791e
      malff/marcsql@weblab.(none) authored
      into  weblab.(none):/home/marcsql/TREE/mysql-5.0-30237
      ecea791e
    • malff/marcsql@weblab.(none)'s avatar
      Bug#30237 (Performance regression in boolean expressions) · 82f99c93
      malff/marcsql@weblab.(none) authored
      This is a performance bug, related to the parsing or 'OR' and 'AND' boolean
      expressions.
      
      Let N be the number of expressions involved in a OR (respectively AND).
      
      When N=1
      
      For example, "select 1" involve only 1 term: there is no OR operator.
      
      In 4.0 and 4.1, parsing expressions not involving OR had no overhead.
      In 5.0, parsing adds some overhead, with Select->expr_list.
      
      With this patch, the overhead introduced in 5.0 has been removed,
      so that performances for N=1 should be identical to the 4.0 performances,
      which are optimal (there is no code executed at all)
      
      The overhead in 5.0 was in fact affecting significantly some operations.
      For example, loading 1 Million rows into a table with INSERTs,
      for a table that has 100 columns, leads to parsing 100 Millions of
      expressions, which means that the overhead related to Select->expr_list
      is executed 100 Million times ...
      
      Considering that N=1 is by far the most probable expression,
      this case should be optimal.
      
      When N=2
      
      For example, "select a OR b" involves 2 terms in the OR operator.
      
      In 4.0 and 4.1, parsing expressions involving 2 terms created 1 Item_cond_or
      node, which is the expected result.
      In 5.0, parsing these expression also produced 1 node, but with some extra
      overhead related to Select->expr_list : creating 1 list in Select->expr_list
      and another in Item_cond::list is inefficient.
      
      With this patch, the overhead introduced in 5.0 has been removed
      so that performances for N=2 should be identical to the 4.0 performances.
      Note that the memory allocation uses the new (thd->mem_root) syntax
      directly.
      The cost of "is_cond_or" is estimated to be neglectable: the real problem
      of the performance degradation comes from unneeded memory allocations.
      
      When N>=3
      
      For example, "select a OR b OR c ...", which involves 3 or more terms.
      
      In 4.0 and 4.1, the parser had no significant cost overhead, but produced
      an Item tree which is difficult to evaluate / optimize during runtime.
      In 5.0, the parser produces a better Item tree, using the Item_cond
      constructor that accepts a list of children directly, but at an extra cost
      related to Select->expr_list.
      
      With this patch, the code is implemented to take the best of the two
      implementations:
      - there is no overhead with Select->expr_list
      - the Item tree generated is optimized and flattened.
      
      This is achieved by adding children nodes into the Item tree directly,
      with Item_cond::add(), which avoids the need for temporary lists and memory
      allocation
      
      Note that this patch also provide an extra optimization, that the previous
      code in 5.0 did not provide: expressions are flattened in the Item tree,
      based on what the expression already parsed is, and not based on the order
      in which rules are reduced.
      
      For example : "(a OR b) OR c", "a OR (b OR c)" would both be represented
      with 2 Item_cond_or nodes before this patch, and with 1 node only with this
      patch. The logic used is based on the mathematical properties of the OR
      operator (it's associative), and produces a simpler tree.
      82f99c93
  6. 21 Aug, 2007 2 commits
  7. 20 Aug, 2007 1 commit
  8. 18 Aug, 2007 1 commit
  9. 17 Aug, 2007 2 commits
  10. 16 Aug, 2007 3 commits
  11. 15 Aug, 2007 7 commits
  12. 14 Aug, 2007 1 commit
  13. 13 Aug, 2007 4 commits
  14. 10 Aug, 2007 1 commit
  15. 08 Aug, 2007 1 commit
  16. 07 Aug, 2007 4 commits
  17. 06 Aug, 2007 2 commits