Re: [Maria-developers] Sachin weekly report
Hello everyone, Weekly Report for 6th week of gsoc 1.hidden fields fully supported , they also show in extra column 2.suppose if we declare key as unique(abc,df) then instead of key name to be abc it will be abc_df 3.prototype and prototype for how to store information about hash and type of hash in field and KEY finally decided to add bool flag (is_row_hash) in Field and added a new long flag in KEY named ex_flags it is stored and retried from extra2 region 4. studying optimizer code for where condition on unique key. 5. Now it will give error for these statements create table t1(abc blob unique,index(db_row_hash_1)); alter table t2 add column abc blob unique,add index(db_row_hash_1); 6.now we can delete unique blob columns.Db_row_hash will be automatically removed currently working on case like create table t1(a blob,b blob ,unique(a,b)); alter table t1 drop column a; this works after alter but records stored in table can be duplicate which voids the unique key rule. Regards sachin ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers Post to : maria-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Maria-developers] GSoC weekly reports (Unique indexes for blobs)
GSoC (week 6) Hello everyone, 1. defined some new functions to get the clustered record from secondary index record and extract its key value to compare with the secondary index key.It works for single clustered record. Currently trying to solve the problem with multiple records with same hash value. 2.implemented some new functions for the update operation. 2.1 a function which checks if hash columns in a table need to be updated. 2.2 a function to add hash fields in update vector. 3.When updating a row, sql layer calls index_read function for faster retrieval of a row if the column used in where clause is one of the keys or a part of the key. So I modified index_read function to convert mysql search key in innobase format and then create a new search key with a hash value.As hash index stores only hash value, it will be only possible to search a row with a hash index if all of the key parts are present in search key. current branch for InnoDB : temp On 27 June 2016 at 19:23, Shubham Barai wrote: > GSoC (week 5) > > > Hello everyone, > > Here is the list of things I have done in the 5th week of GSoC. > > 1.implemented unique key violation with a hash collision. (actual row > comparison is remaining ). > > 2.modified hash function for data types like varchar and binary data types. > > 3.fixed a bug which was causing a server to crash for complex unique keys. > > 4.added support to allow any number of nulls which will not cause any > unique key violation. > > 5.added test cases for above features. > > On 22 June 2016 at 16:36, Shubham Barai wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> can we discuss on IRC first? >> >> >> Regards, >> Shubham >> >> On 22 June 2016 at 13:21, Jan Lindström >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Please commit and push these changes to your git branch I have not yet >>> seen them, in my opinion as this is only a working branch you can push >>> often. I still fail to see any test cases on InnoDB branch, do you have >>> more than one branch and if you have why ? Depending on extent of these >>> changes my estimate is that you are behind schedule to complete project in >>> time. Based on your progress report you are still missing update and delete >>> and redo-logging. For alter table you should start from forcing copy-method >>> and then if time permits develop on-line method. This naturally only after >>> everything else >>> has been completed and tested. >>> >>> R: Jan >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:06 PM, Shubham Barai < >>> shubhambara...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> GSoC (week 4) Hello everyone, After working on create table operation,next thing I had to work on was insert operations.So I explored some of the functions like row_ins_scan_index_for_duplicates, btr_pcur_get_rec to get clear understanding about how to implement duplicate search on hash index. There was a problem in hash function that I wrote .It would calculate same hash value for two different keys if the prefix length of blob key part was zero. Now it seems to be working after I checked it in debugger.I still have to modify it for data types like varchar etc. I have added test cases for insert operations in myisam. In MyIsam, I found one problem in update operation. When updating a row,if the key is conflicting then server crashes because some pointer goes invalid in compare_record. I haven't fixed this issue yet. I also modified some functions in dict0load.cc to adjust some members of dict_index_t for a new index type.The main problem is that index entry for hash based index cointains only two fields(hash value and row id) while dict_index_t contains hash field and other user defined fields which are used to calculate hash value.Some of the operations like alter table( e.g. rename column) needs to get access to all fields while other functions like rec_get_offsets and row_build_index_entry_low needs to get access to only hash field and row id. I am still working on this to find efficient solution to this problem. On 16 June 2016 at 23:29, Sergei Golubchik wrote: > Hi, Shubham! > > What I wanted to say on IRC was: > > here's what the comment of cmp_dtuple_rec_with_match_low() says: > > ... If rec has an externally stored field we do not > compare it but return with value 0 if such a comparison should be > made. > > Note that blobs are externally stored fields in InnoDB, so, I think, > this means that you cannot use cmp_dtuple_rec() to compare blobs. > > Regards, > Sergei > Chief Architect MariaDB > and secur...@mariadb.org > ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers Post to : maria-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers More help : https://help.la
Re: [Maria-developers] MariaDB 10.1.15
Am 04.07.2016 um 14:01 schrieb Antonio Fernandes: What happened to MariaDB 10.1.15? I've upgraded my slave server, waited a few days (like I always do before master) and now, no MariaDB 10.1.15 :) Ohh, btw, 10.1.14 changelog (https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/mariadb-10114-changelog/) still displays that 10.1.15 is the latest when you follow devel/users list it has a crash-bug regression, see archives signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers Post to : maria-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Maria-developers] MariaDB 10.1.15
Hi all, What happened to MariaDB 10.1.15? I've upgraded my slave server, waited a few days (like I always do before master) and now, no MariaDB 10.1.15 :) Ohh, btw, 10.1.14 changelog (https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/mariadb-10114-changelog/) still displays that 10.1.15 is the latest. Regards, António ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers Post to : maria-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Maria-developers] MDEV-8919 Wrong result for CAST(9999999999999999999.0)
Hi Sergei,
Please review a patch for mdev-8919.
Thanks!
commit f683cd85b3ba14aa7a40bf774dd2a0e0d5dd4d6f
Author: Alexander Barkov
Date: Mon Jul 4 13:29:58 2016 +0400
MDEV-8919 Wrong result for CAST(999.0)
diff --git a/mysql-test/r/cast.result b/mysql-test/r/cast.result
index e196ba2..08e8a92 100644
--- a/mysql-test/r/cast.result
+++ b/mysql-test/r/cast.result
@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ CAST(CAST(1-2 AS UNSIGNED) AS SIGNED INTEGER)
-1
Warnings:
Note 1105 Cast to unsigned converted negative integer to it's positive complement
+Note 1105 Cast to signed converted positive out-of-range integer to it's negative complement
select CAST('10 ' as unsigned integer);
CAST('10 ' as unsigned integer)
10
@@ -29,6 +30,8 @@ Note 1105 Cast to unsigned converted negative integer to it's positive complemen
select ~5, cast(~5 as signed);
~5 cast(~5 as signed)
18446744073709551610 -6
+Warnings:
+Note 1105 Cast to signed converted positive out-of-range integer to it's negative complement
explain extended select ~5, cast(~5 as signed);
id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows filtered Extra
1 SIMPLE NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL No tables used
@@ -37,6 +40,8 @@ Note 1003 select ~(5) AS `~5`,cast(~(5) as signed) AS `cast(~5 as signed)`
select cast(18446744073709551615 as signed);
cast(18446744073709551615 as signed)
-1
+Warnings:
+Note 1105 Cast to signed converted positive out-of-range integer to it's negative complement
select cast(5 as unsigned) -6.0;
cast(5 as unsigned) -6.0
-1.0
@@ -208,12 +213,16 @@ CAST(0xb3 as signed)
select CAST(0x8fff as signed);
CAST(0x8fff as signed)
-8070450532247928833
+Warnings:
+Note 1105 Cast to signed converted positive out-of-range integer to it's negative complement
select CAST(0x as unsigned);
CAST(0x as unsigned)
18446744073709551615
select CAST(0xfffe as signed);
CAST(0xfffe as signed)
-2
+Warnings:
+Note 1105 Cast to signed converted positive out-of-range integer to it's negative complement
select cast('-10a' as signed integer);
cast('-10a' as signed integer)
-10
@@ -548,6 +557,8 @@ cast(18446744073709551615 as unsigned)
select cast(18446744073709551615 as signed);
cast(18446744073709551615 as signed)
-1
+Warnings:
+Note 1105 Cast to signed converted positive out-of-range integer to it's negative complement
select cast('18446744073709551615' as unsigned);
cast('18446744073709551615' as unsigned)
18446744073709551615
@@ -578,6 +589,8 @@ Note 1105 Cast to signed converted positive out-of-range integer to it's negativ
select cast(1.0e+300 as signed int);
cast(1.0e+300 as signed int)
9223372036854775807
+Warnings:
+Warning 1916 Got overflow when converting '1e300' to INT. Value truncated.
create table t1 select cast(1 as unsigned), cast(1 as signed), cast(1 as double(5,2)), cast(1 as decimal(5,3)), cast("A" as binary), cast("A" as char(100)), cast("2001-1-1" as DATE), cast("2001-1-1" as DATETIME), cast("1:2:3" as TIME);
show create table t1;
Table Create Table
@@ -822,3 +835,87 @@ utf8_bin
select collation(cast("a" as char(10) binary ascii));
collation(cast("a" as char(10) binary ascii))
latin1_bin
+#
+# Start of 10.2 tests
+#
+#
+# MDEV-8919 Wrong result for CAST(999.0)
+#
+SELECT CAST(-9e0 AS UNSIGNED) AS c1;
+c1
+0
+Warnings:
+Warning 1916 Got overflow when converting '-9' to UNSIGNED INT. Value truncated.
+SELECT CAST(-9.0 AS UNSIGNED) AS c2;
+c2
+0
+Warnings:
+Warning 1916 Got overflow when converting '-9.0' to UNSIGNED INT. Value truncated.
+SELECT CAST(999e0 AS UNSIGNED) AS c1;
+c1
+1000
+SELECT CAST(999.0 AS UNSIGNED) AS c2;
+c2
+999
+SELECT CAST(e0 AS UNSIGNED) AS c1;
+c1
+18446744073709551615
+Warnings:
+Warning 1916 Got overflow when converting '1e20' to UNSIGNED INT. Value truncated.
+SELECT CAST(.0 AS UNSIGNED) AS c2;
+c2
+18446744073709551615
+Warnings:
+Warning 1916 Got overflow when converting '.0' to UNSIGNED INT. Value truncated.
+SELECT CAST(-1e0 AS UNSIGNED), CAST(-1e308 AS UNSIGNED);
+CAST(-1e0 AS UNSIGNED) CAST(-1e308 AS UNSIGNED)
+0 0
+Warnings:
+Warning 1916 Got overflow when converting '-1' to UNSIGNED INT. Value truncated.
+Warning 1916 Got overflow when converting '-1e308' to UNSIGNED INT. Value truncated.
+SELECT CAST(TIME'-00:00:01.567' AS UNSIGNED);
+CAST(TIME'-00:00:01.567' AS UNSIGNED)
+0
+Warnings:
+Warning 1916 Got overflow when converting '-00:00:01.567000' to UNSIGNED INT. Value truncated.
+CREATE TABLE t1 (a DOUBLE UNSIGNED, b DOUBLE);
+INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (1e19, 1e19),(1.9e19, 1.9e19);
+SELECT a, CAST(a AS SIGNED), CAST(b AS SIGNED) FROM t1;
+a CAST(a AS SIGNED) CAST(b AS SIGNED)
+1e19 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807
+1.9e19 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807
+Warnings:
+Warning 1916 Got overflow when converting '1e19' to INT. Value t
