diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | RELEASE-NOTES.txt | 7 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | src/main/java/com/amazon/carbonado/qe/CompositeScore.java | 14 |
2 files changed, 19 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/RELEASE-NOTES.txt b/RELEASE-NOTES.txt index 5f6379f..b5411c2 100644 --- a/RELEASE-NOTES.txt +++ b/RELEASE-NOTES.txt @@ -1,6 +1,13 @@ Carbonado change history
------------------------
+1.1-BETA9 to 1.1-BETA10
+-------------------------------
+- JDBCSupportStrategy cleans up database product name before using it to
+ determine custom support strategy class name.
+- Added additional index selection tie-breaker if index is most likely defined
+ to support desired ordering.
+
1.1-BETA8 to 1.1-BETA9
-------------------------------
- Fixed bug in JDBC repository which caused cursor skip to skip everything.
diff --git a/src/main/java/com/amazon/carbonado/qe/CompositeScore.java b/src/main/java/com/amazon/carbonado/qe/CompositeScore.java index 9992690..e031fe2 100644 --- a/src/main/java/com/amazon/carbonado/qe/CompositeScore.java +++ b/src/main/java/com/amazon/carbonado/qe/CompositeScore.java @@ -224,8 +224,18 @@ public class CompositeScore<S extends Storable> { return preferenceResult;
}
- // Preference scores are the same? That seems unlikely, but
- // choose the better filtering index.
+ // Okay, preference is not helping. If handled filter count is
+ // the same, choose the better ordering. Why? Most likely a nearly
+ // identical index was created specifically for ordering. One index
+ // might look better for filtering just because it is clustered.
+
+ if (firstScore.getHandledCount() == secondScore.getHandledCount()) {
+ if (handledScore != 0) {
+ return handledScore;
+ }
+ }
+
+ // Just return the result for the better filtering index.
return result;
}
|