DB2 - Problem description
Problem IC80535 | Status: Closed |
QUERY RETURNS INCORRECT RESULTS FOR A CORRELATED SUBQUERY AGAINST A DATA PARTITIONED TABLE. | |
product: | |
DB2 FOR LUW / DB2FORLUW / 950 - DB2 | |
Problem description: | |
If the access plan for a correlated subquery contains a nested loop join with a partitioned table on the inner side of the join, and if the join predicate AND the correlated predicate are pushed down into the scan of the partitioned table, then it's possible that wrong results may occur. The defect is a logic problem during query runtime where data partitions are incorrectly eliminated from the scan, resulting in the scan failing to qualify records that should have otherwise been found. | |
Problem Summary: | |
QUERY RETURNS INCORRECT RESULTS FOR A CORRELATED SUBQUERY AGAINST A DATA PARTITIONED TABLE. | |
Local Fix: | |
Since the problem is dependent upon the above mentioned access plan, it may be possible to get an alternate access plan that avoids the problematic codepath in runtime. | |
available fix packs: | |
DB2 Version 9.5 Fix Pack 9 for Linux, UNIX, and Windows | |
Solution | |
If the access plan for a correlated subquery contains a nested loop join with a partitioned table on the inner side of the join, and if the join predicate AND the correlated predicate are pushed down into the scan of the partitioned table, then it's possible that wrong results may occur. The defect is a logic problem during query runtime where data partitions are incorrectly eliminated from the scan, resulting in the scan failing to qualify records that should have otherwise been found. | |
Workaround | |
Since the problem is dependent upon the above mentioned access plan, it may be possible to get an alternate access plan that avoids the problematic codepath in runtime. | |
BUG-Tracking | |
forerunner : APAR is sysrouted TO one or more of the following: IC80536 follow-up : | |
Timestamps | |
Date - problem reported : Date - problem closed : Date - last modified : | 20.12.2011 08.03.2012 08.03.2012 |
Problem solved at the following versions (IBM BugInfos) | |
Problem solved according to the fixlist(s) of the following version(s) | |
9.5.0.9 |