X-Git-Url: http://git.shadowcat.co.uk/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?a=blobdiff_plain;f=lib%2FDBIx%2FClass%2FStorage%2FDBI%2FMSSQL.pm;h=7896a86715e2493effa56952b35ecea301923e89;hb=4ceaa6b5f05de445c7ffd4c47da2c81006050e62;hp=ea1269a8cdb1c052a0c6b62749a1913080e21f1a;hpb=6de07ea386016c9a45b51ad919ac22563bb4d9d6;p=dbsrgits%2FDBIx-Class.git diff --git a/lib/DBIx/Class/Storage/DBI/MSSQL.pm b/lib/DBIx/Class/Storage/DBI/MSSQL.pm index ea1269a..7896a86 100644 --- a/lib/DBIx/Class/Storage/DBI/MSSQL.pm +++ b/lib/DBIx/Class/Storage/DBI/MSSQL.pm @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ package DBIx::Class::Storage::DBI::MSSQL; use strict; use warnings; -use base qw/DBIx::Class::Storage::DBI::AmbiguousGlob DBIx::Class::Storage::DBI/; +use base qw/DBIx::Class::Storage::DBI/; use mro 'c3'; use List::Util(); @@ -192,8 +192,8 @@ sub _select_args_to_query { my $attrs = $_[3]; if ( scalar $self->sql_maker->_order_by_chunks ($attrs->{order_by}) ) { $self->throw_exception( - 'An ordered subquery encountered. Please see "Ordered Subqueries" in DBIx::Class::Storage::DBI::MSSQL - ') unless $attrs->{unsafe_subquery}; + 'An ordered subselect encountered - this is not safe! Please see "Ordered Subselects" in DBIx::Class::Storage::DBI::MSSQL + ') unless $attrs->{unsafe_subselect_ok}; my $max = 2 ** 32; $sql =~ s/^ \s* SELECT \s/SELECT TOP $max /xi; } @@ -308,44 +308,53 @@ $table_name ON>. Unfortunately this operation in MSSQL requires the C privilege, which is normally not included in the standard write-permissions. -=head2 Ordered Subqueries +=head2 Ordered Subselects - # this is deemed unsafe and throws under MSSQL - $rs->search ({}, { - prefetch => 'relation', - rows => 2, - offset => 3, - }); +If you attempted the following query (among many others) in Microsoft SQL +Server - # however this should work (but please check what comes back from the db) $rs->search ({}, { - unsafe_subquery => 1, prefetch => 'relation', rows => 2, offset => 3, }); -DBIC can do truly wonderful things with the aid of subqueries, and does so -automatically when necessary. Especially useful are ordered subqueries, -which allow things like "Give me things number 4 to 6 (ordered by name), and -prefetch all their relationss, no matter how many". In its pursuit of standards -Microsft SQL Server goes to great lengths to forbid the use of ordered -subqueries. While there is a hack which fools the syntax checker, the optimizer -may B. Testing has determined that while -such breakage does occur (the test suite contains an explicit test which -demonstrates the problem), it is relative rare. The benefits of ordered -subqueries are on the other hand too great to be outright disabled for MSSQL. +You may be surprised to receive an exception. The reason for this is a quirk +in the MSSQL engine itself, and sadly doesn't have a sensible workaround due +to the way DBIC is built. DBIC can do truly wonderful things with the aid of +subselects, and does so automatically when necessary. The list of situations +when a subselect is necessary is long and still changes often, so it can not +be exhaustively enumerated here. The general rule of thumb is a joined +L relationship with limit/group +applied to the left part of the join. + +In its "pursuit of standards" Microsft SQL Server goes to great lengths to +forbid the use of ordered subselects. This breaks a very useful group of +searches like "Give me things number 4 to 6 (ordered by name), and prefetch +all their relations, no matter how many". While there is a hack which fools +the syntax checker, the optimizer may B. +Testing has determined that while such breakage does occur (the test suite +contains an explicit test which demonstrates the problem), it is relative +rare. The benefits of ordered subselects are on the other hand too great to be +outright disabled for MSSQL. Thus compromise between usability and perfection is the MSSQL-specific -L C. +L C. It is deliberately not possible to set this on the Storage level, as the user should inspect (and preferrably regression-test) the return of every such -ResultSet individually. +ResultSet individually. The example above would work if written like: + + $rs->search ({}, { + unsafe_subselect_ok => 1, + prefetch => 'relation', + rows => 2, + offset => 3, + }); If it is possible to rewrite the search() in a way that will avoid the need for this flag - you are urged to do so. If DBIC internals insist that an -ordered subquery is necessary for an operation, and you believe there is a -differnt way to express the query - please file a bugreport. +ordered subselect is necessary for an operation, and you believe there is a +differnt/better way to get the same result - please file a bugreport. =head1 AUTHOR