Hi Sergei!

Actually I completed the work on update and delete. Now they will use index for looking up records. 

But I am thinking I have done a lot of changes in optimizer which may break it , and also there are lots of queries where my
code does not work, fixing this might take a long amount of time. 
I am thinking of a change in my existing code :-
Suppose a table t1
    create table t1 (a blob, b blob, c blob, unique(a,b,c));
In current code , for query like there will a KEY with only one keypart which points to field DB_ROW_HASH_1.
It was okay for normal updates , insert and delete , but in the case of where optimization  I have do a lot of stuff , first to match field (like in add_key_part), then see whether all the fields in hash_str are present in where or not, then create keys by calculating hash. I do this by checking  the HA_UNIQUE_HASH flag in KEY , but this also makes (I think) optimizer code 
bad because of too much dependence. Also  I need to patch get_mm_parts and get_mm_leaf function , which I think  
should not be patched.

I am thinking of a another approach to this problem at server level instead of having just one keypart we can have 1+3 
keypart. Last three keypart will be for field a, b, c and first one for DB_ROW_HASH_1 .These will be only at server level not at 
storage level. key_info->key_part will point at keypart containing field a , while key_part having field DB_ROW_HASH_1 will
-1 index. By this way I do not have to patch more of optimizer code. But there is one problem , what should be the length of 
key_part? I am thinking of it equal to field->pack_length(), this would not work because while creating keys optimizer 
calls get_key_image() (which is real data so can exceed pack_lenght() in case of blob), so to get this work I have to patch 
optimizer  where it calls  get_key_image() and see if key is HA_UNIQUE_HASH . If yes then instead of get_key_image just use
                                     memcpy(key, field->ptr(), field->pack_length());

this wont copy the actual data, but we do not need actual data. I will patch handler methods like ha_index_read, ha_index_idx_read , multi_range_read_info_const basically handler methods which are related to index or range search.
In these methods i  need to calculate hash , which I can calculate from key_ptr but key_ptr doe not have actual data(in case
 of blobs etc).So to get the date for hash , I will make a field clone of  (a,b,c etc) but there ptr will point in key_ptr. Then 
field->val_str() method will work simply and i can calculate hash. And also I can compare returned  result with actual key in 
handler method itself. 
What do you think of this approach ?

Regards 
sachin

On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 11:16 PM, Sergei Golubchik <serg@mariadb.org> wrote:
Hi, Sachin!

On Aug 19, Sachin Setia wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Sergei Golubchik <serg@mariadb.org> wrote:
>
> > First. I believe you'll need to do your final evaluation soon, and
> > it will need to have a link to the code. Did you check google
> > guidelines about it? Is everything clear there? Do you need help
> > publishing your work in a format that google requires?
> >
> > They don't accept delays for any reasons, so even if your code is
> > not 100% complete and ready, you'd better still publish it and
> > submit the evaluation, because otherwise google will fail you and
> > that'd be too sad.
> >
> > If you'd like you can publish the google-way only the
> > unique-constraint part without further optimizer work. Or at least
> > please mention that you'd completed the original project and went
> > working on extensions.  I mean, it's better than saying "the code is
> > not 100% complete" :)
> >
> Okay I am thinking of writing a blog post with a link to my github
> repository.
> Blog Link <http://sachin1001gsoc.blogspot.in/2016/08/gsoc-2016.html>
> Please check this.

I think that'll do, yes.

Regards,
Sergei
Chief Architect MariaDB
and security@mariadb.org