- 24 Nov, 2009 2 commits
-
-
Alexey Kopytov authored
-
Alexey Kopytov authored
-
- 10 Nov, 2009 1 commit
-
-
Christopher Powers authored
The crash occurs because SAFEMALLOC is defined for the MySQL server but not for the Archive or Federated engines, resulting in a parameter mismatch between the function prototype and definition for functions using the CALLER_INFO macro.
-
- 09 Nov, 2009 1 commit
-
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
- 05 Nov, 2009 20 commits
-
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Sergey Vojtovich authored
-
Sergey Vojtovich authored
-
Sergey Vojtovich authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
Alexander Nozdrin authored
-
- 04 Nov, 2009 5 commits
-
-
hery.ramilison@sun.com authored
-
Georgi Kodinov authored
-
Georgi Kodinov authored
-
Georgi Kodinov authored
-
Georgi Kodinov authored
-
- 03 Nov, 2009 11 commits
-
-
Davi Arnaut authored
-
Davi Arnaut authored
-
Konstantin Osipov authored
Bug#41756 "Strange error messages about locks from InnoDB". In JT_EQ_REF (join_read_key()) access method, don't try to unlock rows in the handler, unless certain that a) they were locked b) they are not used. Unlocking of rows is done by the logic of the nested join loop, and is unaware of the possible caching that the access method may have. This could lead to double unlocking, when a row was unlocked first after reading into the cache, and then when taken from cache, as well as to unlocking of rows which were actually used (but taken from cache). Delegate part of the unlocking logic to the access method, and in JT_EQ_REF count how many times a record was actually used in the join. Unlock it only if it's usage count is 0. Implemented review comments.
-
Magnus Blåudd authored
-
Konstantin Osipov authored
Bug#41756 "Strange error messages about locks from InnoDB". In JT_EQ_REF (join_read_key()) access method, don't try to unlock rows in the handler, unless certain that a) they were locked b) they are not used. Unlocking of rows is done by the logic of the nested join loop, and is unaware of the possible caching that the access method may have. This could lead to double unlocking, when a row was unlocked first after reading into the cache, and then when taken from cache, as well as to unlocking of rows which were actually used (but taken from cache). Delegate part of the unlocking logic to the access method, and in JT_EQ_REF count how many times a record was actually used in the join. Unlock it only if it's usage count is 0. Implemented review comments.
-
Kristofer Pettersson authored
-
Kristofer Pettersson authored
-
Sergey Vojtovich authored
-
Sergey Vojtovich authored
- re-enabled main.innodb_bug44369; - re-enabled main.innodb_bug47777; - re-enabled innodb.innodb_information_schema.
-
Jorgen Loland authored
values return too many records WHERE clauses with "outer_value_list NOT IN subselect" were handled incorrectly if the outer value list contained multiple items where at least one of these could be NULL. The first outer record with NULL value was handled correctly, but if a second record with NULL value existed, the optimizer would choose to reuse the result it got on the last execution of the subselect. This is incorrect if the outer value list has multiple items. The fix is to make Item_in_optimizer::val_int (in item_cmpfunc.cc) reuse the result of the latest execution for NULL values only if all values in the outer_value_list are NULL.
-
Sergey Vojtovich authored
Detailed revision comments: r6126 | vasil | 2009-10-30 10:36:07 +0200 (Fri, 30 Oct 2009) | 45 lines branches/zip: Merge r6112:6125 from branches/5.1: (skipping r6122 and r6123, Jimmy says these are already present and need not be merged): ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r6122 | jyang | 2009-10-30 05:18:38 +0200 (Fri, 30 Oct 2009) | 7 lines Changed paths: M /branches/5.1/handler/ha_innodb.cc M /branches/5.1/mysql-test/innodb_bug44369.result M /branches/5.1/mysql-test/innodb_bug44369.test M /branches/5.1/mysql-test/innodb_bug46000.result M /branches/5.1/mysql-test/innodb_bug46000.test branches/5.1: Chnage WARN_LEVEL_ERROR to WARN_LEVEL_WARN for push_warning_printf() call in innodb. Fix Bug#47233: Innodb calls push_warning(MYSQL_ERROR::WARN_LEVEL_ERROR) rb://170 approved by Marko. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r6123 | jyang | 2009-10-30 05:43:06 +0200 (Fri, 30 Oct 2009) | 8 lines Changed paths: M /branches/5.1/os/os0proc.c branches/5.1: In os_mem_alloc_large(), if we fail to attach the shared memory, reset memory pointer ptr to NULL, and allocate memory from conventional pool. This is a port from branches/zip. Bug #48237 Error handling in os_mem_alloc_large appears to be incorrect rb://198 Approved by: Marko ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r6125 | vasil | 2009-10-30 10:31:23 +0200 (Fri, 30 Oct 2009) | 4 lines Changed paths: M /branches/5.1/handler/ha_innodb.cc branches/5.1: White-space fixup. ------------------------------------------------------------------------
-