06.03.2021 14:53, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
Now I wonder, what would be necessary to introduce this alternative?
Would this be a matter of adding the right alternative and adding the
order by and offset/fetch info to the RseNode returned by the query
expression, or would more be needed?
I'm afraid it's not gonna work.
RseNode has dsqlOrder, but it's not used directly inside the parser
(query_spec does not define ordering itself), so at the first glance it
looks like it could be safely assigned in the new parser rules. However,
implementation inside pass1.cpp moves the order node from SelectExprNode
into underlying RseNode::dsqlOrder, so it might undo your work at the
parser level in cases like this:
( select ... order by A ) order by B
in this particular example it's OK, as nobody would see the ordering by
A anyway. But it FIRST/ROWS/FETCH is applied too, ordering by A becomes
a requirement.
As for OFFSET/FETCH, things are even trickier. RseNode supports
dsqlFirst/dsqlSkip, but they're used for legacy FIRST/SKIP inside
query_spec. What to do in these cases:
(select first 10 ...) fetch first 5 rows
( select ... fetch first 10 rows ) fetch first 5 rows
where "10" may be replaced with "5". This looks safer than for the ORDER
BY case but I'm not sure I can see all the subsequences.
Perhaps query_term should return SelectExprNode* and the new parser
rules define new SelectExprNode with querySpec/orderClause/rowsClause
set up based on select_expr_body/order_clause_opt/rows_clause. But I'm
pretty sure some code places are not prepared to see query_term as
SelectExprNode*.
Dmitry
Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
