Solutions to Inconsistent GaussDB(DWS) Query Results

Window Function Results Are Incompletely Sorted

Scenario:

 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

select * from t3 order by 1,2,3;
 a | b | c 
---+---+--- 
 1 | 2 | 1 
 1 | 2 | 2 
 1 | 2 | 3
(3 rows) 

select c,rn from (select c,row_number() over(order by a,b) as rn from t3) where rn = 1; 
 c | rn 
---+---- 
1  |  1
(1 row) 
select c,rn from (select c,row_number() over(order by a,b) as rn from t3) where rn = 1;
 c | rn 
---+---- 
 3 |  1
(1 row)

Analysis:

As shown above, run select c,rn from (select c,row_number() over(order by a,b) as rn from t3) where rn = 1; twice, the results are different. That is because duplicate values 1 and 2 exist in the sorting columns a and b of the window function while their values in column c are different. As a result, when the first record is obtained based on the sorting result in columns a and b, the obtained data in column c is random, as a result, the result sets are inconsistent.

Solution:

 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11

select c,rn from (select c,row_number() over(order by a,b,c) as rn from t3) where rn = 1;
 c | rn 
---+----
 1 |  1
(1 row)

select c,rn from (select c,row_number() over(order by a,b,c) as rn from t3) where rn = 1;
 c | rn 
---+----
 1 |  1
(1 row)

Using Sorting in Subviews/Subqueries

Scenario

1
2
3
4
5
6

CREATE TBALE test(a serial ,b int);
INSERT INTO test(b) VALUES(1);
INSERT INTO test(b) SELECT b FROM test;
...
INSERT INTO test(b) SELECT b FROM test;
CREATE VIEW v as SELECT * FROM test ORDER BY a;

Problem SQL:

 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

select * from v limit 1;
 a | b
---+---
 3 | 1
(1 row)

select * from (select *from test order by a) limit 10;
 a  | b
----+---
 14 | 1
(1 row)

select * from test order by a limit 10;
 a | b
---+---
 1 | 1
(1 row)

Analysis:

ORDER BY is invalid for subviews and subqueries.

Solution:

You are not advised to use ORDER BY in subviews and subqueries. To ensure that the results are in order, use ORDER BY in the outermost query.

LIMIT in Subqueries

Scenario: When LIMIT is used in a subquery, the two query results are inconsistent.

 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11

select * from (select a from test limit 1 ) order by 1;
 a
---
 5
(1 row)

select * from (select a from test limit 1 ) order by 1;
 a
---
 1
(1 row)

Analysis:

The LIMIT in the subquery causes random results to be obtained.

Solution:

To ensure the stability of the final query result, do not use LIMIT in subqueries.

Using String_agg

Scenario: When string_agg is used to query the table employee, the query results are inconsistent.

 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

select * from employee;
 empno | ename  |   job   | mgr  |      hiredate       |  sal  | comm | deptno 
-------+--------+---------+------+---------------------+-------+------+--------
  7654 | MARTIN | SALEMAN | 7698 | 2022-11-08 00:00:00 | 12000 | 1400 |     30
  7566 | JONES  | MANAGER | 7839 | 2022-11-08 00:00:00 | 32000 |    0 |     20
  7499 | ALLEN  | SALEMAN | 7698 | 2022-11-08 00:00:00 | 16000 |  300 |     30
(3 rows)

select count(*) from (select deptno, string_agg(ename, ',') from employee group by deptno) t1, (select deptno, string_agg(ename, ',') from employee group by deptno) t2 where t1.string_agg = t2.string_agg;
 count 
-------
     2
(1 row)

select count(*) from (select deptno, string_agg(ename, ',') from employee group by deptno) t1, (select deptno, string_agg(ename, ',') from employee group by deptno) t2 where t1.string_agg = t2.string_agg;
 count 
-------
     1
(1 row)

Analysis:

The string_agg function is used to concatenate data in a group into one row. However, if you use string_agg(ename, ','), the order of concatenated results needs to be specified. For example, in the preceding statement, select deptno, string_agg(ename, ',') from employee group by deptno;

can output either of the following:

1

30 | ALLEN,MARTIN

Or:

1

30 |MARTIN,ALLEN

In the preceding scenario, the result of subquery t1 may be different from that of subquery t2 when deptno is 30.

Solution:

Add ORDER BY to String_agg to ensure that data is concatenated in sequence.

1

select count(*) from (select deptno, string_agg(ename, ',' order by ename desc) from employee group by deptno) t1 ,(select deptno, string_agg(ename, ',' order by ename desc) from employee group by deptno) t2 where t1.string_agg = t2.string_agg;

Database Compatibility Mode

Scenario: The query results of empty strings in the database are inconsistent.

database1 (TD-compatible):

1
2
3
4
5

td=# select '' is null;
 isnull 
--------
 f
(1 row)

database2 (ORA compatible):

1
2
3
4
5

ora=# select '' is null;
 isnull 
--------
 t
(1 row)

Analysis:

The empty string query results are different because the syntax of the empty string is different from that of the null string in different database compatibility.

Currently, GaussDB(DWS) supports three types of database compatibility: Oracle, TD, and MySQL. The syntax and behavior vary depending on the compatibility. For details about the compatibility differences, see "Syntax Compatibility Differences Among Oracle, Teradata, and MySQL" in Developer Guide

Databases in different compatibility modes have different compatibility issues. You can run select datname, datcompatibility from pg_database; to check the database compatibility.

Solution:

The problem is solved when the compatibility modes of the databases in the two environments are set to the same. The DBCOMPATIBILITY attribute of a database does not support ALTER. You can only specify the same DBCOMPATIBILITY attribute when creating a database.

The configuration item behavior_compat_options for database compatibility behaviors is configured inconsistently.

Scenario: The calculation results of the add_months function are inconsistent.

database1:

1
2
3
4
5

select add_months('2018-02-28',3) from dual;
add_months
---------------------
2018-05-28 00:00:00
(1 row)

database2:

1
2
3
4
5

select add_months('2018-02-28',3) from dual;
add_months
---------------------
2018-05-31 00:00:00
(1 row)

Analysis:

Some behaviors vary according to the database compatibility configuration item behavior_compat_options. For details about the parameter options, see "GUC Parameters > Miscellaneous Parameters > behavior_compat_options" in Developer Guide.

The end_month_calculate in behavior_compat_options controls the calculation logic of the add_months function. If this parameter is specified, and the Day of param1 indicates the last day of a month shorter than result, the Day in the calculation result will equal that in result.

Solution:

The behavior_compat_options parameter must be configured consistently. This parameter is of the USERSET type and can be set at the session level or modified at the cluster level.

The attributes of the user-defined function are not properly set.

Scenario: When the customized function get_count() is invoked, the results are inconsistent.

 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11

CREATE FUNCTION get_count() returns int
SHIPPABLE
as $$
declare
    result int;
begin
result = (select count(*) from test); --test table is a hash table.
	return result;
end;
$$
language plpgsql;

Call this function.

 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11

SELECT get_count();
 get_count 
-----------
      2106
(1 row)

SELECT get_count() FROM t_src;
 get_count 
-----------
      1032
(1 row)

Analysis:

This function specifies the SHIPPABLE attribute. When a plan is generated, the function pushes it down to DNs for execution. The test table defined in the function is a hash table. Therefore, each DN has only part of the data in the table, the result returned by select count(*) from test; is not the result of full data in the test table. The expected result changes after from is added.

Solution:

Use either of the following methods (the first method is recommended):

1. Change the function to not push down: ALTER FUNCTION get_count() not shippable;
2. Change the table used in the function to a replication table. In this way, the full data of the table is stored on each DN. Even if the plan is pushed down to DNs for execution, the result set will be as expected.

Using the Unlogged Table

Scenario:

After an unlogged table is used and the cluster is restarted, the associated query result set is abnormal, and some data is missing in the unlogged table.

Analysis:

If max_query_retry_times is set to 0 and the keyword UNLOGGED is specified during table creation, the created table will be an unlogged table. Data written to unlogged tables is not written to the write-ahead log, which makes them considerably faster than ordinary tables. However, an unlogged table is automatically truncated after a crash or unclean shutdown, incurring data loss risks. The contents of an unlogged table are also not replicated to standby servers. Any indexes created on an unlogged table are not automatically logged as well. If the cluster restarts unexpectedly (process restart, node fault, or cluster restart), some data in the memory is not flushed to disks in a timely manner, and some data is lost, causing the result set to be abnormal.

Solution:

The security of unlogged tables cannot be ensured if the cluster goes faulty. In most cases, unlogged tables are only used as temporary tables. If a cluster is faulty, you need to rebuild the unlogged table or back up the data and import it to the database again to ensure that the data is normal.