Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

util: fix build ranger's collation #31226

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 4, 2022

Conversation

wjhuang2016
Copy link
Member

@wjhuang2016 wjhuang2016 commented Dec 31, 2021

Signed-off-by: wjhuang2016 huangwenjun1997@gmail.com

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #31216

Problem Summary:
When building range for scalarfunction, we should not use expr.CharsetAndCollation() to get the collation.
For col1 > 'a' or col1 >'b' , it always gets binCollation.
So we need to pass collation to Build().

What is changed and how it works?

Pass column's collation to Build() and use it.

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  • No code

Side effects

  • Performance regression: Consumes more CPU
  • Performance regression: Consumes more Memory
  • Breaking backward compatibility

Documentation

  • Affects user behaviors
  • Contains syntax changes
  • Contains variable changes
  • Contains experimental features
  • Changes MySQL compatibility

Release note

None

Signed-off-by: wjhuang2016 <huangwenjun1997@gmail.com>
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

ti-chi-bot commented Dec 31, 2021

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

  • Reminiscent
  • winoros

To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling /cc @reviewer in the comment.
After your PR has acquired the required number of LGTMs, you can assign this pull request to the committer in the list by filling /assign @committer in the comment to help you merge this pull request.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review.
Reviewer can cancel approval by submitting a request changes review.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Dec 31, 2021
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Dec 31, 2021
@winoros
Copy link
Member

winoros commented Dec 31, 2021

/run-check_dev_2

@wjhuang2016 wjhuang2016 added the needs-cherry-pick-release-5.4 Should cherry pick this PR to release-5.4 branch. label Dec 31, 2021
@sre-bot
Copy link
Contributor

sre-bot commented Dec 31, 2021

@wjhuang2016
Copy link
Member Author

/run-check_dev_2

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. and removed status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. labels Jan 4, 2022
@Reminiscent
Copy link
Contributor

/merge

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge.

Commit hash: 58ac106

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Jan 4, 2022
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot merged commit e3124ae into pingcap:master Jan 4, 2022
ti-srebot pushed a commit to ti-srebot/tidb that referenced this pull request Jan 4, 2022
Signed-off-by: ti-srebot <ti-srebot@pingcap.com>
@ti-srebot
Copy link
Contributor

cherry pick to release-5.4 in PR #31268

ti-chi-bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 6, 2022
@wjhuang2016 wjhuang2016 deleted the fix_point_collation branch January 7, 2022 04:17
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
needs-cherry-pick-release-5.4 Should cherry pick this PR to release-5.4 branch. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Wrong result because of wrong table scan range
6 participants