roachtest: tlp failed: SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects makes incorrect transformation #88993

cockroach-teamcity · 2022-09-29T13:17:12Z

roachtest.tlp failed with artifacts on master @ 4780ee15194e7d22b661ac92254b13cd2b71dcb1:

test artifacts and logs in: /artifacts/tlp/run_1
	tlp.go:179,tlp.go:75,test_runner.go:928: expected unpartitioned and partitioned results to be equal
		(1) attached stack trace
		  -- stack trace:
		  | github.com/cockroachdb/cockroach/pkg/cmd/roachtest/tests.runTLPQuery.func2
		  | 	github.com/cockroachdb/cockroach/pkg/cmd/roachtest/tests/tlp.go:267
		  | github.com/cockroachdb/cockroach/pkg/cmd/roachtest/tests.runWithTimeout.func1
		  | 	github.com/cockroachdb/cockroach/pkg/cmd/roachtest/tests/tlp.go:290
		  | runtime.goexit
		  | 	GOROOT/src/runtime/asm_amd64.s:1594
		Wraps: (2) expected unpartitioned and partitioned results to be equal
		  |   []string{
		  | - 	"2466559136",
		  | + 	"416233601",
		  |   }
		  | sql: SELECT MIN(first) FROM (SELECT * FROM defaultdb.public.table3 AS tab_15580) tab_15580(first)
		  | SELECT MIN(agg) FROM (SELECT MIN(first) AS agg FROM (SELECT * FROM defaultdb.public.table3 AS tab_15580 WHERE (NULL OR EXISTS (WITH with_387 (col_1057) AS (SELECT * FROM (VALUES ((NULL, 0:::OID))) AS tab_15581 (col_1057)), with_388 (col_1058) AS (SELECT * FROM (VALUES (0.2983944561166533:::FLOAT8), ((-0.7761676685224073):::FLOAT8), ((-2.0824722316068613):::FLOAT8), (NULL), ((-0.820130187622559):::FLOAT8), (0.5816144538486323:::FLOAT8)) AS tab_15582 (col_1058)) SELECT CASE WHEN true THEN e'0b\x19x\x10.h':::STRING:::NAME ELSE e'Ay\x13':::STRING:::NAME END AS col_1059, 'k':::rand_typ_1 AS col_1060 FROM defaultdb.public.table2 AS tab_15583 JOIN defaultdb.public.table2 AS tab_15584 ON (tab_15583.col2_0) = (tab_15584.col2_0), defaultdb.public.table4@table4_expr_col4_3_idx AS tab_15585, with_388 AS cte_ref_125))) tab_15580(first) UNION ALL SELECT MIN(first) AS agg FROM (SELECT * FROM defaultdb.public.table3 AS tab_15580 WHERE NOT ((NULL OR EXISTS (WITH with_387 (col_1057) AS (SELECT * FROM (VALUES ((NULL, 0:::OID))) AS tab_15581 (col_1057)), with_388 (col_1058) AS (SELECT * FROM (VALUES (0.2983944561166533:::FLOAT8), ((-0.7761676685224073):::FLOAT8), ((-2.0824722316068613):::FLOAT8), (NULL), ((-0.820130187622559):::FLOAT8), (0.5816144538486323:::FLOAT8)) AS tab_15582 (col_1058)) SELECT CASE WHEN true THEN e'0b\x19x\x10.h':::STRING:::NAME ELSE e'Ay\x13':::STRING:::NAME END AS col_1059, 'k':::rand_typ_1 AS col_1060 FROM defaultdb.public.table2 AS tab_15583 JOIN defaultdb.public.table2 AS tab_15584 ON (tab_15583.col2_0) = (tab_15584.col2_0), defaultdb.public.table4@table4_expr_col4_3_idx AS tab_15585, with_388 AS cte_ref_125)))) tab_15580(first) UNION ALL SELECT MIN(first) AS agg FROM (SELECT * FROM defaultdb.public.table3 AS tab_15580 WHERE ((NULL OR EXISTS (WITH with_387 (col_1057) AS (SELECT * FROM (VALUES ((NULL, 0:::OID))) AS tab_15581 (col_1057)), with_388 (col_1058) AS (SELECT * FROM (VALUES (0.2983944561166533:::FLOAT8), ((-0.7761676685224073):::FLOAT8), ((-2.0824722316068613):::FLOAT8), (NULL), ((-0.820130187622559):::FLOAT8), (0.5816144538486323:::FLOAT8)) AS tab_15582 (col_1058)) SELECT CASE WHEN true THEN e'0b\x19x\x10.h':::STRING:::NAME ELSE e'Ay\x13':::STRING:::NAME END AS col_1059, 'k':::rand_typ_1 AS col_1060 FROM defaultdb.public.table2 AS tab_15583 JOIN defaultdb.public.table2 AS tab_15584 ON (tab_15583.col2_0) = (tab_15584.col2_0), defaultdb.public.table4@table4_expr_col4_3_idx AS tab_15585, with_388 AS cte_ref_125))) IS NULL) tab_15580(first))
		  | with args: []
		Error types: (1) *withstack.withStack (2) *errutil.leafError

Parameters: ROACHTEST_cloud=gce , ROACHTEST_cpu=4 , ROACHTEST_encrypted=false , ROACHTEST_ssd=0

Help

See: roachtest README

See: How To Investigate (internal)

/cc @cockroachdb/sql-queries _{This test on roachdash | Improve this report!

Jira issue: CRDB-20069}

The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:

mgartner · 2022-09-30T13:40:34Z

Partially reduced SQL from the first failure: https://gist.github.com/mgartner/1ea50716d6b1e61a1d955172d3d4cfe8. Still working on reducing more.

Update: further reduced: https://gist.github.com/mgartner/549fa5a709ded4ba92f50b31d0ad57c0

Fully reduced example:

CREATE TABLE t (
  a INT,
  b INT,
  c INT,
  INDEX (b, c, a) PARTITION BY LIST (b, c) (
    PARTITION p1 VALUES IN ((11, 50))
  )
);

INSERT INTO t (a, b, c) VALUES (1, 10, 150), (0, 11, 100);

-- The min should be 0, but 1 is returned.
SELECT min(a) FROM t;

This doesn't reproduce in v21.2, so I believe it was introduced in v22.1.0.

The plan looks ok to me, but it seems like the filter is incorrectly filtering the row where a=0. Maybe the scan is incorrectly produce a=NULL for that row.

EXPLAIN ANALYZE (DISTSQL)
SELECT min(a) FROM t;
----
planning time: 10µs
execution time: 100µs
distribution: <hidden>
vectorized: <hidden>
rows read from KV: 2 (16 B, 2 gRPC calls)
maximum memory usage: <hidden>
network usage: <hidden>
regions: <hidden>
·
• group (scalar)
│ nodes: <hidden>
│ regions: <hidden>
│ actual row count: 1
│
└── • limit
    │ count: 1
    │
    └── • union all
        │ nodes: <hidden>
        │ regions: <hidden>
        │ actual row count: 1
        │
        ├── • scan
        │     nodes: <hidden>
        │     regions: <hidden>
        │     actual row count: 0
        │     KV time: 0µs
        │     KV contention time: 0µs
        │     KV rows read: 0
        │     KV bytes read: 0 B
        │     KV gRPC calls: 0
        │     estimated max memory allocated: 0 B
        │     missing stats
        │     table: t@t_b_c_a_idx
        │     spans: (/11/50/NULL - /11/50]
        │     limit: 1
        │
        └── • limit
            │ count: 1
            │
            └── • filter
                │ nodes: <hidden>
                │ regions: <hidden>
                │ actual row count: 1
                │ filter: a IS NOT NULL
                │
                └── • scan
                      nodes: <hidden>
                      regions: <hidden>
                      actual row count: 2
                      KV time: 0µs
                      KV contention time: 0µs
                      KV rows read: 2
                      KV bytes read: 16 B
                      KV gRPC calls: 2
                      estimated max memory allocated: 0 B
                      missing stats
                      table: t@t_b_c_a_idx
                      spans: [/NULL - /11/49] (/11/51/NULL - ]
·
Diagram: https://cockroachdb.github.io/distsqlplan/decode.html#eJzEUtFO2zAUfd9X3N0n0IISt2UPfiqrQEIrLSod0jRVlRtfhWiJndk3WhHqZ-0H9mVT4iEI0G4wob3lHp8TH99zbtB_K1DixfH4eDSHMjd7ah9OZtMzYIzQWE0TVZJH-QUFLiKsnE3Je-sa6KYlnOo1yiTC3FQ1N_AiwtQ6QnmDnHNBKHGuVgXNSGlycYIRamKVF-1vecjL1TJdqmWu1xjhyBZ1abwEhRFeVKr5jCefxuODWIj4MAFlNAiwfEUOI_x4CZyXJCH5-cOHObWGyXBuzaMjZ797cKS0hF5AVtdMt5B4Dx8Cms3OR5CqovCBeHY5GoFnqiC1tWHYozXHueF9CUn7oEAg-rqNUKo1lFRadw2qKGyqmLSEpL1wpTi9Ig-25qpmCQ2_dXoL9HCxiTBMvzfsWWWEUmyiv0_hJC-YHLlYdCMIuIShgNMLmEzn0OwbIxznZc7QsGlNaf14pX90LrY67z3H-f3-9F7Qn7Y58du7GonO615couRxiZKnOpT8_w4lW5Pob03iLgDrNDnS3dUPxTtcbJ6Ia2IPbBX3u-zXLFPynDIdZZmjTLF18aBr8WjyeTmZzpdNT_aGYv9VvA6e43VGvrLGU8fn9i0sIiSdUcjO29qldO5s2l4TxmmrawFNnsOpCMOpCUeNwftisVPc74jFQ3HvX8T9neLBbtuDneLDB-LF5s2vAAAA__-le0bE

rytaft · 2022-09-30T16:33:16Z

I've opened an issue for the second failure here: #89101. (I've hidden the failure to minimize distraction here)

mgartner · 2022-09-30T18:17:33Z

The plan looks ok to me, but it seems like the filter is incorrectly filtering the row where a=0. Maybe the scan is incorrectly produce a=NULL for that row.

The plan is not correct, actually. We're building a LIMIT 1 below the union all in SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects that should not be there.

DrewKimball · 2022-09-30T18:30:18Z

I think the limits below the union all are expected; we only need one min row from each input in order to get the min row for the whole query.

mgartner · 2022-09-30T18:37:38Z

Here's a reproduction that does not require partitions:

statement ok
CREATE TABLE t2 (
  a INT,
  b INT,
  c INT,
  INDEX (b, c, a)
);

statement ok
INSERT INTO t2 (a, b, c) VALUES (1, 10, 20), (0, 11, 100);

# This should return 0, but returns 1.
query I
SELECT min(a) FROM t2 WHERE (b <= 11 AND c < 50) OR (b = 11 AND c = 50) OR (b >= 11 AND c > 50)
----
1

You can see in the plan that there is a limit incorrectly constructed below the UnionAll:

query T
EXPLAIN (OPT, VERBOSE)
SELECT min(a) FROM t2 WHERE (b <= 11 AND c < 50) OR (b = 11 AND c = 50) OR (b >= 11 AND c > 50)
----
scalar-group-by
 ├── columns: min:7
 ├── cardinality: [1 - 1]
 ├── stats: [rows=1]
 ├── cost: 43.5286371
 ├── key: ()
 ├── fd: ()-->(7)
 ├── distribution: test
 ├── prune: (7)
 ├── limit
 │    ├── columns: a:1 b:2 c:3
 │    ├── internal-ordering: +1
 │    ├── cardinality: [0 - 1]
 │    ├── stats: [rows=1]
 │    ├── cost: 43.4886371
 │    ├── key: ()
 │    ├── fd: ()-->(1-3)
 │    ├── distribution: test
 │    ├── union-all
 │    │    ├── columns: a:1 b:2 c:3
 │    │    ├── left columns: a:9 b:10 c:11
 │    │    ├── right columns: a:15 b:16 c:17
 │    │    ├── cardinality: [0 - 2]
 │    │    ├── stats: [rows=1.273811]
 │    │    ├── cost: 43.4686371
 │    │    ├── ordering: +1
 │    │    ├── limit hint: 1.00
 │    │    ├── distribution: test
 │    │    ├── limit
 │    │    │    ├── columns: a:9 b:10 c:11
 │    │    │    ├── cardinality: [0 - 1]
 │    │    │    ├── stats: [rows=0.2738108]
 │    │    │    ├── cost: 15.0073854
 │    │    │    ├── key: ()
 │    │    │    ├── fd: ()-->(9-11)
 │    │    │    ├── limit hint: 1.00
 │    │    │    ├── distribution: test
 │    │    │    ├── interesting orderings: (+9 opt(10,11))
 │    │    │    ├── select
 │    │    │    │    ├── columns: a:9 b:10 c:11
 │    │    │    │    ├── stats: [rows=0.2738108, distinct(10)=0.273811, null(10)=0, distinct(11)=0.273811, null(11)=0]
 │    │    │    │    ├── cost: 14.9946473
 │    │    │    │    ├── fd: ()-->(10,11)
 │    │    │    │    ├── limit hint: 1.00
 │    │    │    │    ├── distribution: test
 │    │    │    │    ├── interesting orderings: (+9 opt(10,11))
 │    │    │    │    ├── scan t2@t2_b_c_a_idx
 │    │    │    │    │    ├── columns: a:9 b:10 c:11
 │    │    │    │    │    ├── constraint: /10/11/9/12: (/11/50/NULL - /11/50]
 │    │    │    │    │    ├── stats: [rows=0.8214324, distinct(9)=0.821432, null(9)=0, distinct(10)=0.821432, null(10)=0, distinct(11)=0.821432, null(11)=0, distinct(10,11)=0.821432, null(10,11)=0, distinct(9-11)=0.821432, null(9-11)=0]
 │    │    │    │    │    ├── cost: 14.956433
 │    │    │    │    │    ├── fd: ()-->(10,11)
 │    │    │    │    │    ├── distribution: test
 │    │    │    │    │    └── interesting orderings: (+9 opt(10,11))
 │    │    │    │    └── filters
 │    │    │    │         └── (((b:10 <= 11) AND (c:11 < 50)) OR ((b:10 = 11) AND (c:11 = 50))) OR ((b:10 >= 11) AND (c:11 > 50)) [outer=(10,11), constraints=(/10: (/NULL - ]; /11: (/NULL - /49] [/50 - /50] [/51 - ])]
 │    │    │    └── 1
 │    │    └── limit
 │    │         ├── columns: a:15 b:16 c:17
 │    │         ├── cardinality: [0 - 1]
 │    │         ├── stats: [rows=1]
 │    │         ├── cost: 28.4385135
 │    │         ├── key: ()
 │    │         ├── fd: ()-->(15-17)
 │    │         ├── limit hint: 1.00
 │    │         ├── distribution: test
 │    │         ├── interesting orderings: (+16,+17,+15)
 │    │         ├── select
 │    │         │    ├── columns: a:15 b:16 c:17
 │    │         │    ├── stats: [rows=37.0066, distinct(15)=37.0066, null(15)=0, distinct(16)=33.3333, null(16)=0, distinct(17)=32.7553, null(17)=0, distinct(15,17)=37.0066, null(15,17)=0]
 │    │         │    ├── cost: 28.4185135
 │    │         │    ├── limit hint: 1.00
 │    │         │    ├── distribution: test
 │    │         │    ├── interesting orderings: (+16,+17,+15)
 │    │         │    ├── scan t2@t2_b_c_a_idx
 │    │         │    │    ├── columns: a:15 b:16 c:17
 │    │         │    │    ├── constraint: /16/17/15/18
 │    │         │    │    │    ├── (/NULL - /11/49]
 │    │         │    │    │    └── (/11/51/NULL - ]
 │    │         │    │    ├── stats: [rows=333.3333, distinct(15)=98.2658, null(15)=3.33333, distinct(16)=33.3333, null(16)=0, distinct(17)=98.2658, null(17)=3.33333, distinct(15,17)=333.333, null(15,17)=0.0333333]
 │    │         │    │    ├── cost: 28.2884395
 │    │         │    │    ├── limit hint: 9.01
 │    │         │    │    ├── distribution: test
 │    │         │    │    └── interesting orderings: (+16,+17,+15)
 │    │         │    └── filters
 │    │         │         ├── (((b:16 <= 11) AND (c:17 < 50)) OR ((b:16 = 11) AND (c:17 = 50))) OR ((b:16 >= 11) AND (c:17 > 50)) [outer=(16,17), constraints=(/16: (/NULL - ]; /17: (/NULL - /49] [/50 - /50] [/51 - ])]
 │    │         │         └── a:15 IS NOT NULL [outer=(15), constraints=(/15: (/NULL - ]; tight)]
 │    │         └── 1
 │    └── 1
 └── aggregations
      └── const-agg [as=min:7, outer=(1)]
           └── a:1

mgartner · 2022-09-30T18:38:19Z

I think the limits below the union all are expected; we only need one min row from each input in order to get the min row for the whole query.

How can that be? If the scan has multiple spans, then we aren't guaranteed to get rows the original Limit's ordering.

mgartner · 2022-09-30T18:49:48Z

I think this is the problem:

cockroach/pkg/sql/opt/xform/general_funcs.go

Line 731 in 8389ac4

c.EmptyOrdering(),

We construct a non-ordered limit when it should actually be ordered.

mgartner · 2022-09-30T18:53:27Z

Or the problem is that we are using limit in both these places instead of newHardLimit:

cockroach/pkg/sql/opt/xform/general_funcs.go

Line 577 in 8389ac4

limit,

cockroach/pkg/sql/opt/xform/general_funcs.go

Line 657 in 8389ac4

    
           newScanOrSelect = c.wrapScanInLimitedSelect(newScanOrSelect, sp, newScanPrivate, filters, limit)

This commit removes some untested logic in `SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects` that created invalid expression transformations. With this logic, this rule could construct an unordered limit below the `UnionAll` which is incorrect. The bug could cause incorrect query results. Fixes cockroachdb#88993 Release note (bug fix): A bug has been fixed that could cause incorrect results in rare cases. This bug was present since version 22.1.0.

This commit removes some untested logic in `SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects` that created invalid expression transformations. With this logic, this rule could construct an unordered limit below the `UnionAll` which is incorrect. The bug could cause incorrect query results. Fixes cockroachdb#88993 Release note (bug fix): A bug has been fixed that could cause incorrect results in rare cases. The bug could only present if the following conditions were true: 1. A query with `ORDER BY` and `LIMIT` was executed. 2. The table containing the `ORDER BY` columns had an index containing those columns. 3. The index in (2) contained a prefix of columns held to a fixed number of values by the query filter (e.g., `WHERE a IN (1, 3)`), a `CHECK` constraint (e.g., `CHECK (a IN (1, 3))`), inferred by a computed column expression (e.g. `WHERE a IN (1, 3)` and a column `b INT AS (a + 10) STORED`), or inferred by a `PARTITION BY` clause (e.g. `INDEX (a, ...) PARTITION BY LIST (a) (PARTITION p VALUES ((1), (3)))`). This bug was present since version 22.1.0.

89003: storage: CheckSSTConflicts performance fixes r=erikgrinaker a=itsbilal storage: Use range key masking in CheckSSTConflicts This change uses range key masking in case of import cancellation/restart inside CheckSSTConflicts. This prevents point keys shadowed by range tombstones from appearing to CheckSSTConflicts, significantly speeding up its runtime and allowing import restarts to succeed without getting wedged. Unblocks #87309. Release note: None. --- storage: Move no-overlap fast path up in CheckSSTConflicts This change moves up the fast path in CheckSSTConflicts where we check for any engine keys within the overlapping SST keys. If no engine keys are found, we can return from the function immediately. Previously we'd open a range-key sst iterator before doing this check, which has a pretty significant construction cost. Fixes #88702. Release note: None 89088: reduce: remove and simplify index PARTITION BY clauses r=mgartner a=mgartner Release note: None 89113: opt: fix invalid transformation in SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects r=mgartner a=mgartner #### opt: fix invalid transformation in SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects This commit removes some untested logic in `SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects` that created invalid expression transformations. With this logic, this rule could construct an unordered limit below the `UnionAll` which is incorrect. The bug could cause incorrect query results. Fixes #88993 Release note (bug fix): A bug has been fixed that could cause incorrect results in rare cases. The bug could only present if the following conditions were true: 1. A query with `ORDER BY` and `LIMIT` was executed. 2. The table containing the `ORDER BY` columns had an index containing those columns. 3. The index in (2) contained a prefix of columns held to a fixed number of values by the query filter (e.g., `WHERE a IN (1, 3)`), a `CHECK` constraint (e.g., `CHECK (a IN (1, 3))`), inferred by a computed column expression (e.g. `WHERE a IN (1, 3)` and a column `b INT AS (a + 10) STORED`), or inferred by a `PARTITION BY` clause (e.g. `INDEX (a, ...) PARTITION BY LIST (a) (PARTITION p VALUES ((1), (3)))`). This bug was present since version 22.1.0. 89166: storage: improve `BenchmarkUpdateSSTTimestamps` r=erikgrinaker a=erikgrinaker This patch improves `BenchmarkUpdateSSTTimestamps`, by running separate benchmarks varying the number of keys and concurrency. In particular, this exercises the `sstable.RewriteKeySuffixes` fast path, while the old benchmark only used the naïve read/write slow path. Touches #88723. Release note: None Co-authored-by: Bilal Akhtar <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Marcus Gartner <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Erik Grinaker <[email protected]>

This commit removes some untested logic in `SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects` that created invalid expression transformations. With this logic, this rule could construct an unordered limit below the `UnionAll` which is incorrect. The bug could cause incorrect query results. Fixes #88993 Release note (bug fix): A bug has been fixed that could cause incorrect results in rare cases. The bug could only present if the following conditions were true: 1. A query with `ORDER BY` and `LIMIT` was executed. 2. The table containing the `ORDER BY` columns had an index containing those columns. 3. The index in (2) contained a prefix of columns held to a fixed number of values by the query filter (e.g., `WHERE a IN (1, 3)`), a `CHECK` constraint (e.g., `CHECK (a IN (1, 3))`), inferred by a computed column expression (e.g. `WHERE a IN (1, 3)` and a column `b INT AS (a + 10) STORED`), or inferred by a `PARTITION BY` clause (e.g. `INDEX (a, ...) PARTITION BY LIST (a) (PARTITION p VALUES ((1), (3)))`). This bug was present since version 22.1.0.

cockroach-teamcity added this to the 22.2 milestone Sep 29, 2022

blathers-crl bot added the T-sql-queries SQL Queries Team label Sep 29, 2022

This comment was marked as off-topic.

Sign in to view

rytaft mentioned this issue Sep 30, 2022

roachtest.tlp failed: incorrect cardinality of EXCEPT produces incorrect results #89101

Closed

mgartner changed the title ~~roachtest: tlp failed~~ roachtest: tlp failed: incorrect column value fetched from partitioned index Sep 30, 2022

mgartner changed the title ~~roachtest: tlp failed: incorrect column value fetched from partitioned index~~ roachtest: tlp failed: SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects makes incorrect transformation Sep 30, 2022

mgartner added the S-1 High impact: many users impacted, serious risk of high unavailability or data loss label Sep 30, 2022

mgartner self-assigned this Sep 30, 2022

mgartner mentioned this issue Sep 30, 2022

opt: fix invalid transformation in SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects #89113

Merged

craig bot closed this as completed in d6ccd10 Oct 3, 2022

blathers-crl bot mentioned this issue Oct 3, 2022

release-22.2: opt: fix invalid transformation in SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects #89250

Merged

mgartner mentioned this issue Oct 4, 2022

release-22.1: opt: fix invalid transformation in SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects #89281

Merged

blathers-crl bot mentioned this issue Oct 4, 2022

release-22.2.0: opt: fix invalid transformation in SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects #89344

Merged

mgartner added this to SQL Queries Jul 24, 2023

mgartner moved this to Done in SQL Queries Jul 24, 2023

rytaft added C-technical-advisory Caused a technical advisory branch-release-22.1 Used to mark GA and release blockers, technical advisories, and bugs for 22.1 labels Dec 6, 2023

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

roachtest: tlp failed: SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects makes incorrect transformation #88993

roachtest: tlp failed: SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects makes incorrect transformation #88993

cockroach-teamcity commented Sep 29, 2022 •

edited by cockroach-jira-scripts

Loading

This comment was marked as off-topic.

mgartner commented Sep 30, 2022 •

edited

Loading

rytaft commented Sep 30, 2022

mgartner commented Sep 30, 2022

DrewKimball commented Sep 30, 2022

mgartner commented Sep 30, 2022

mgartner commented Sep 30, 2022

mgartner commented Sep 30, 2022

mgartner commented Sep 30, 2022

roachtest: tlp failed: SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects makes incorrect transformation #88993

roachtest: tlp failed: SplitLimitedSelectIntoUnionSelects makes incorrect transformation #88993

Comments

cockroach-teamcity commented Sep 29, 2022 • edited by cockroach-jira-scripts Loading

This comment was marked as off-topic.

mgartner commented Sep 30, 2022 • edited Loading

rytaft commented Sep 30, 2022

mgartner commented Sep 30, 2022

DrewKimball commented Sep 30, 2022

mgartner commented Sep 30, 2022

mgartner commented Sep 30, 2022

mgartner commented Sep 30, 2022

mgartner commented Sep 30, 2022

cockroach-teamcity commented Sep 29, 2022 •

edited by cockroach-jira-scripts

Loading

mgartner commented Sep 30, 2022 •

edited

Loading