planner: update some UTs from cost model1 to model2 #39085
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
[REVIEW NOTIFICATION] This pull request has been approved by:
To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review. |
ti-chi-bot
added
release-note-none
qw4990
added
sig/planner
qw4990
commented
Nov 11, 2022
| @@ -240,7 +241,7 @@ func TestPrepareCacheWithBinding(t *testing.T) { | |||
| ps = []*util.ProcessInfo{tkProcess} | |||
| tk.Session().SetSessionManager(&testkit.MockSessionManager{PS: ps}) | |||
| res = tk.MustQuery("explain for connection " + strconv.FormatUint(tkProcess.ID, 10)) | |||
| require.False(t, tk.HasPlan4ExplainFor(res, "IndexReader")) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Expected, TableScan -> IndexScan.
qw4990
commented
Nov 11, 2022
executor/join_test.go
Outdated
| @@ -1468,25 +1469,23 @@ func TestIndexNestedLoopHashJoin(t *testing.T) { | |||
| tk.MustExec("set @@tidb_index_join_batch_size=2") | |||
| tk.MustQuery("desc format = 'brief' select * from t l1 where exists ( select * from t l2 where l2.l_orderkey = l1.l_orderkey and l2.l_suppkey <> l1.l_suppkey ) order by `l_orderkey`,`l_linenumber`;").Check(testkit.Rows( | |||
| "Sort 7.20 root test.t.l_orderkey, test.t.l_linenumber", | |||
| "└─IndexHashJoin 7.20 root semi join, inner:IndexLookUp, outer key:test.t.l_orderkey, inner key:test.t.l_orderkey, equal cond:eq(test.t.l_orderkey, test.t.l_orderkey), other cond:ne(test.t.l_suppkey, test.t.l_suppkey)", | |||
| "└─HashJoin 7.20 root semi join, equal:[eq(test.t.l_orderkey, test.t.l_orderkey)], other cond:ne(test.t.l_suppkey, test.t.l_suppkey)", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Expected, HashJoin is more robust.
qw4990
commented
Nov 11, 2022
| " └─TableFullScan_14 10000.00 cop[tikv] table:t1 keep order:false, stats:pseudo" | ||
| "└─HashAgg_12(Probe) 8000.00 root group by:test.t1.a, funcs:firstrow(test.t1.a)->test.t1.a", | ||
| " └─TableReader_13 8000.00 root data:HashAgg_8", | ||
| " └─HashAgg_8 8000.00 cop[tikv] group by:test.t1.a, ", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Expected, pushing it down is safer.
qw4990
commented
Nov 11, 2022
| "└─IndexReader_19 1.00 root index:StreamAgg_9", | ||
| " └─StreamAgg_9 1.00 cop[tikv] funcs:count(1)->Column#7", | ||
| " └─IndexRangeScan_17 99.90 cop[tikv] table:t1, index:idx2(c1, c2) range:[\"0xfff\" -inf,\"0xfff\" +inf], keep order:false, stats:pseudo")) | ||
| "HashAgg_12 1.00 root funcs:count(Column#6)->Column#5", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Expected, model2 prefers to use HashAgg instead of StreamAgg.
qw4990
commented
Nov 11, 2022
| "HashAgg 1.00 root funcs:count(Column#8)->Column#7", | ||
| "└─TableReader 1.00 root data:ExchangeSender", | ||
| " └─ExchangeSender 1.00 mpp[tiflash] ExchangeType: PassThrough", | ||
| " └─HashAgg 1.00 mpp[tiflash] funcs:count(1)->Column#8", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Expected, pushing it down to the TiFlash is safer.
Reminiscent
approved these changes
Nov 11, 2022
fzzf678
approved these changes
Nov 11, 2022
ti-chi-bot
added
status/LGT2
ti-chi-bot
added
the
size/XL
|
/merge |
|
This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge. Commit hash: de79b12
|
ti-chi-bot
added
the
status/can-merge
|
/run-mysql-test |
TiDB MergeCI notify🔴 Bad News! New failing [1] after this pr merged.
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What problem does this PR solve?
Issue Number: ref #35240
Problem Summary: planner: update some UTs from cost model1 to model2
What is changed and how it works?
planner: update some UTs from cost model1 to model2
Check List
Tests
Side effects
Documentation
Release note
Please refer to Release Notes Language Style Guide to write a quality release note.