| Index: third_party/sqlite/sqlite-src-3100200/test/analyze8.test
|
| diff --git a/third_party/sqlite/src/test/analyze8.test b/third_party/sqlite/sqlite-src-3100200/test/analyze8.test
|
| similarity index 93%
|
| copy from third_party/sqlite/src/test/analyze8.test
|
| copy to third_party/sqlite/sqlite-src-3100200/test/analyze8.test
|
| index 4384c39676fc683a526626fbdd545b2082818494..1079e68080d1c5d0de8ceafb84ecf5f00f7c269a 100644
|
| --- a/third_party/sqlite/src/test/analyze8.test
|
| +++ b/third_party/sqlite/sqlite-src-3100200/test/analyze8.test
|
| @@ -86,23 +86,23 @@ do_test 2.1 {
|
| # range.
|
| #
|
| # Test 3.2 is a little unstable. It depends on the planner estimating
|
| -# that (b BETWEEN 50 AND 54) will match more rows than (c BETWEEN
|
| +# that (b BETWEEN 30 AND 34) will match more rows than (c BETWEEN
|
| # 800000 AND 900000). Which is a pretty close call (50 vs. 32), so
|
| # the planner could get it wrong with an unlucky set of samples. This
|
| # case happens to work, but others ("b BETWEEN 40 AND 44" for example)
|
| # will fail.
|
| #
|
| do_execsql_test 3.0 {
|
| - SELECT count(*) FROM t1 WHERE b BETWEEN 50 AND 54;
|
| + SELECT count(*) FROM t1 WHERE b BETWEEN 30 AND 34;
|
| SELECT count(*) FROM t1 WHERE c BETWEEN 0 AND 100000;
|
| SELECT count(*) FROM t1 WHERE c BETWEEN 800000 AND 900000;
|
| } {50 376 32}
|
| do_test 3.1 {
|
| - eqp {SELECT * FROM t1 WHERE b BETWEEN 50 AND 54 AND c BETWEEN 0 AND 100000}
|
| + eqp {SELECT * FROM t1 WHERE b BETWEEN 30 AND 34 AND c BETWEEN 0 AND 100000}
|
| } {0 0 0 {SEARCH TABLE t1 USING INDEX t1b (b>? AND b<?)}}
|
| do_test 3.2 {
|
| eqp {SELECT * FROM t1
|
| - WHERE b BETWEEN 50 AND 54 AND c BETWEEN 800000 AND 900000}
|
| + WHERE b BETWEEN 30 AND 34 AND c BETWEEN 800000 AND 900000}
|
| } {0 0 0 {SEARCH TABLE t1 USING INDEX t1c (c>? AND c<?)}}
|
| do_test 3.3 {
|
| eqp {SELECT * FROM t1 WHERE a=100 AND c BETWEEN 0 AND 100000}
|
|
|