[CASSANDRA-16592] The token function in where clause return incorrect data when using token equal condition and Specified a non-exist token value

• Type: Bug
• Status: Resolved
• Priority: Normal
• Resolution: Duplicate
• Fix Version/s: 3.0.26, 3.11.12, 4.0.2, 4.1-alpha1, 4.1
• Component/s: Legacy/CQL
• Bug Category: Code - Bug - Unclear Impact
• Severity: Normal
• Complexity: Normal
• Discovered By: Code Inspection
• Platform: All
• Assignee: Unassigned
• Reporter: cimon

Reviewers

Ekaterina Dimitrova, Michael Semb Wever

• Created: 12/Apr/21 12:43
• Updated: 16/Dec/22 21:56
• Resolved: 14/Dec/21 14:29

Description

I get incorrect value when use query like 'select Token(pk1,pk2),pk1,pk2 from ks.table1 where token(pk1,pk2) = tokenValue'. The returned token value mismatch the where condition.

This problem is reproduced in 3.11.3 and 4.0.

Here is my schema and select statement

// schema
cqlsh> desc testprefix.cprefix_03 ;CREATE TABLE testprefix.cprefix_03 (
    pk1 int,
    pk2 int,
    ck1 text,
    ck2 text,
    t1 int,
    PRIMARY KEY ((pk1, pk2), ck1, ck2)
) WITH CLUSTERING ORDER BY (ck1 ASC, ck2 ASC)
    AND additional_write_policy = '99p'
    AND bloom_filter_fp_chance = 0.01
    AND caching = {'keys': 'ALL', 'rows_per_partition': 'NONE'}
    AND cdc = false
    AND comment = ''
    AND compaction = {'class': 'org.apache.cassandra.db.compaction.SizeTieredCompactionStrategy', 'max_threshold': '32', 'min_threshold': '4'}
    AND compression = {'chunk_length_in_kb': '16', 'class': 'org.apache.cassandra.io.compress.LZ4Compressor'}
    AND crc_check_chance = 1.0
    AND default_time_to_live = 0
    AND extensions = {}
    AND gc_grace_seconds = 864000
    AND max_index_interval = 2048
    AND memtable_flush_period_in_ms = 0
    AND min_index_interval = 128
    AND read_repair = 'BLOCKING'
    AND speculative_retry = '99p';

execute cql query

// code placeholder
cqlsh> SELECT Token(pk1,pk2), pk1,pk2  from testprefix.cprefix_03 WHERE  token(pk1, pk2) =-9223372036854775808 LIMIT 2; 
system.token(pk1, pk2) | pk1    | pk2
------------------------+--------+---------
   -9222849988925915479 | 394560 | 3394560
   -9222849988925915479 | 394560 | 3394560
(2 rows)

cqlsh> SELECT Token(pk1,pk2) from testprefix.cprefix_03 where pk1 = 394560 and pk2 = 3394560 LIMIT 2; 
system.token(pk1, pk2)
------------------------
   -9222849988925915479
   -9222849988925915479
(2 rows)

cqlsh> SELECT Token(pk1,pk2), pk1,pk2  from testprefix.cprefix_03 WHERE  token(pk1, pk2) =-9222849988925915479 LIMIT 2; 
system.token(pk1, pk2) | pk1    | pk2
------------------------+--------+---------
   -9222849988925915479 | 394560 | 3394560
   -9222849988925915479 | 394560 | 3394560
(2 rows)

we can find  that token value in the condition  are inconsistent with the values in the result.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then review the source code, to seek the anwser. 

// code placeholder
private static void addRange(SSTableReader sstable, AbstractBounds<PartitionPosition> requested, List<AbstractBounds<PartitionPosition>> boundsList)
{
    if (requested instanceof Range && ((Range)requested).isWrapAround())    //  first condition
    {
        if (requested.right.compareTo(sstable.first) >= 0)
        {
            // since we wrap, we must contain the whole sstable prior to stopKey()
            Boundary<PartitionPosition> left = new Boundary<PartitionPosition>(sstable.first, true);
            Boundary<PartitionPosition> right;
            right = requested.rightBoundary();
            right = minRight(right, sstable.last, true);
            if (!isEmpty(left, right))
                boundsList.add(AbstractBounds.bounds(left, right));
        }
        if (requested.left.compareTo(sstable.last) <= 0)
        {
            // since we wrap, we must contain the whole sstable after dataRange.startKey()
            Boundary<PartitionPosition> right = new Boundary<PartitionPosition>(sstable.last, true);
            Boundary<PartitionPosition> left;
            left = requested.leftBoundary();
            left = maxLeft(left, sstable.first, true); // second condition
            if (!isEmpty(left, right))
                boundsList.add(AbstractBounds.bounds(left, right));
        }
    }
    else
    {
        assert requested.left.compareTo(requested.right) <= 0 || requested.right.isMinimum();
        Boundary<PartitionPosition> left, right;
        left = requested.leftBoundary();
        right = requested.rightBoundary();
        left = maxLeft(left, sstable.first, true);
        // apparently isWrapAround() doesn't count Bounds that extend to the limit (min) as wrapping
        right = requested.right.isMinimum() ? new Boundary<PartitionPosition>(sstable.last, true)
                                                : minRight(right, sstable.last, true);
        if (!isEmpty(left, right))
            boundsList.add(AbstractBounds.bounds(left, right));
    }
}

• we use token equal ,so isWrapAround is true.
• requestd.left = requestd.right = -9223372036854775808,
• the real sst dataBoundary.left = -9222849988925915479
• so the maxLeft return the real dataBoudary.left. We get the incorrect  data

 

Issue Links

• duplicates: CASSANDRA-14684 Queries with a clause involving tokens and Long.MIN_VALUE include rows incorrectly