Hello Sergei! Hi Actually I was thinking about how to implement blob as a foreign key.Foreign has to be unique which we can already implement. To make it foreign key we can either store unique hash or the whole blob column. But I am not sure much people want to copy so long blob data in reference table. Second option would be use blob hash as a reference key. But user can not directly us hash as a reference key because that is hidden. What I was thinking of a clear to programmer way of using blob hash. Suppose user can directly create blob hash column ,use that column as a primary key or foreign key.Like create table t1(abc blob , blob hash(abc))//this will just create blob hash column create table t1(abc blob,unique(blob hash(abc))) // this will create unique blob hash column and similar for primary key and foreign key user can enter hash value if they have some good algorithm or if they do not give any value we will automatically create and store hash. What do you think? sir. Regards sachin On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Sachin Setia <sachinsetia1001@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Sergei! As I already told you i was building prototype.It is some what completed apart from one thing comparing of two field values. the difficulty is how to get data length of field from table->record[1]. I will try to solve it. One more thing actually i got how mysql hide field. For example condsider three fields hash,data,data. mysql field pointer point at second field not at hash field and hash field ptr is stored in table->hash_field can we do something similar to store hash fields(if we make array of hashes in case of more than one unique).But will adding member variable cause problem? what do you think? Regards sachin
On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Sachin Setia <sachinsetia1001@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Sergei!
Actually I was going through the mysql source code for unique long constraints in file sql_tmp_table.cc in function create_tmp_table they make a new field and a new key(hash_key) and pass this table obejct to storage engine.They actually refer this field as a hash field On the time of insert they call bool check_unique_constraint(TABLE *table) function which first calculate the hash and store it in field then they see for duplicate hash and retrive ha_index_next_same if records are not same then record
We can do the same thing in mariadb by adding one more field and key in mysql_prepare_create_table in this we check for blob with unlimited length or varchar for length greater then internal storage engine by doing this in mysql_prepare_create_table there will be no issues of frm file inconsistance.
In case of insert first we will fill the hash field in fill_record function of sql_base.cc by first calculating the hash. Then we will retrive the index map using ha_index_read_map if returened value is zero then we will comapare two records and if they match then we will through error I am not sure where to place this code either in fill_record or later Or i can simple just fill hash in field in fill_record and then check for duplicates later on.
Current I am not sure how to hide columns from user.Sir, can you suggest me where to look
But there is one problem we can make unique key by this approch but not primary key because primary key is clustered and hashes can collide so i think we can't use hash field as primary key. To overcome this problem I have one idea instead of storing just hash we can make hash field length 10 bytes and in last two bytes we can store short int which tells how much time hash is repeated this can make hash unique in case of collusion. And also we are not doing more computation because we already retrive all records with same hashes. What do you think of this idea?. And there is one more problem how to make it foreign key.
Will send you a prototype code tomorrow. Regards sachin
On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:23 AM, Sergei Golubchik <serg@mariadb.org> wrote:
Hi, Sachin!
On Apr 13, Sachin Setia wrote:
Hello Sergei Sorry I did not see your mail. Actually i was thinking something like this before implementing the prototype but if i am more closer to innodb the more performance i will i get. I will definitively think about it.
Great!
Could you please tell me (mailing list, that is) what you think before next Monday (before April 18h, that is)?
Regards, Sergei Chief Architect MariaDB and security@mariadb.org