Re: Is this a bug of stored procedure?
never mind. I found the answer: http://dev.mysql.com/tech-resources/articles/mysql-storedproc.html On 5/10/06, tom soyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, I tried to pass the name of a table into a procedure and use that in a select statement. Somehow it doesn't work. Here is the code: create procedure sp3(in tablename varchar(10)) begin select count(*) from tablename; end$ When the procedure is called, I got the following error: ERROR 1146 (42S02): Table 'test.tablename' doesn't exist. Does anyone know why my code generated an error? Is this a bug? Thanks, Tom
Re: Is this a Bug?
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 09:05:50AM +0100, Steve Childs wrote: > Number of processes running now: 1 > mysqld process hanging, pid 28646 - killed > 030813 10:27:35 mysqld restarted > Warning: Ignoring user change to 'mysql' because the user was set to 'mysql' > earlier on the command line > /usr/sbin/mysqld: ready for connections. > Version: '4.0.12-log' socket: '/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock' port: 0 > mysqld: raid.cc:160: my_off_t my_raid_seek(int, long long unsigned int, int, > int): Assertion `pos != (~(my_off_t) 0)' failed. > > > And so on... the log file was 28Kb in size. > > Anyone got any idea why the assertion is failing and whether the warning > about user change needs fixing and what I need to do to fix it! And whether > the assertion has anything to do with mysqld hanging. http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=346 Jeremy -- Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/ MySQL 4.0.13: up 12 days, processed 524,331,116 queries (481/sec. avg) -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is this a Bug?
Hi Frank, I'm running Debian. Best Regards Steve Childs. - Original Message - From: "Franz, Fa. PostDirekt MA" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Steve Childs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 9:29 AM Subject: AW: Is this a Bug? > Hi Steve, > > what LINUX-distibution do you use. > I had similar messages on SUSE 8.0 when trying to connect to the server > from a different engine. > It was a bug in 'glibc', shipped with SUSE 8.0 and they have a patch on their server: > http://www.suse.de/de/private/download/updates/80_i386.html > > maybe it helps > Klaus > > > -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is this a Bug?
> > Secondly, they said they would turn off Raid in 4.0.13 - is that the case > > (didn't spot anything in the changelog) and was that in the max build only? > > Strangely, it seems to have been omitted from the changelog. erm, does that mean it was changed or not!? ;) Best Regards Steve Childs - Original Message - From: "Jeremy Zawodny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Steve Childs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 10:21 AM Subject: Re: Is this a Bug? > On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 09:43:46AM +0100, Steve Childs wrote: > > > http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=346 > > > > > > Jeremy > > > > Cheers Jeremy - I just noticed that the version reported was 4.0.12-max, I'm > > running 4.0.12-log - is that going to affect anything? > > Nope. > > > Secondly, they said they would turn off Raid in 4.0.13 - is that the case > > (didn't spot anything in the changelog) and was that in the max build only? > > Strangely, it seems to have been omitted from the changelog. > > Jeremy > -- > Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo! > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/ > > MySQL 4.0.13: up 12 days, processed 528,475,712 queries (483/sec. avg) > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is this a Bug?
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 09:43:46AM +0100, Steve Childs wrote: > > http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=346 > > > > Jeremy > > Cheers Jeremy - I just noticed that the version reported was 4.0.12-max, I'm > running 4.0.12-log - is that going to affect anything? Nope. > Secondly, they said they would turn off Raid in 4.0.13 - is that the case > (didn't spot anything in the changelog) and was that in the max build only? Strangely, it seems to have been omitted from the changelog. Jeremy -- Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/ MySQL 4.0.13: up 12 days, processed 528,475,712 queries (483/sec. avg) -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is this a Bug?
Cheers, that's it - I did look for any bug reports on this and didn't find any! - doh. Spot on - looks like an mySQL upgrade is in order! Best Regards Steve Childs, Webmaster www.mg-rover.org MG-ROVER.ORG - The ultimate, unofficial MG and Rover enthusiasts' website IMPORTANT INFORMATION: MG-ROVER.ORG is a trading style on Online Enthusiasts Limited and is not connected with, associated with or in any way endorsed by MG Rover Group Limited or any Phoenix Venture Holdings Limited company. The official MG Rover Group Limited website can be found at http://www.mg-rover.com - Original Message - From: "Jeremy Zawodny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Steve Childs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 9:35 AM Subject: Re: Is this a Bug? > On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 09:05:50AM +0100, Steve Childs wrote: > > Number of processes running now: 1 > > mysqld process hanging, pid 28646 - killed > > 030813 10:27:35 mysqld restarted > > Warning: Ignoring user change to 'mysql' because the user was set to 'mysql' > > earlier on the command line > > /usr/sbin/mysqld: ready for connections. > > Version: '4.0.12-log' socket: '/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock' port: 0 > > mysqld: raid.cc:160: my_off_t my_raid_seek(int, long long unsigned int, int, > > int): Assertion `pos != (~(my_off_t) 0)' failed. > > > > > > And so on... the log file was 28Kb in size. > > > > Anyone got any idea why the assertion is failing and whether the warning > > about user change needs fixing and what I need to do to fix it! And whether > > the assertion has anything to do with mysqld hanging. > > http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=346 > > Jeremy > -- > Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo! > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/ > > MySQL 4.0.13: up 12 days, processed 524,331,116 queries (481/sec. avg) > > -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is this a Bug?
> http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=346 > > Jeremy Cheers Jeremy - I just noticed that the version reported was 4.0.12-max, I'm running 4.0.12-log - is that going to affect anything? Secondly, they said they would turn off Raid in 4.0.13 - is that the case (didn't spot anything in the changelog) and was that in the max build only? Best Regards Steve Childs, - Original Message - From: "Jeremy Zawodny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Steve Childs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 9:35 AM Subject: Re: Is this a Bug? > On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 09:05:50AM +0100, Steve Childs wrote: > > Number of processes running now: 1 > > mysqld process hanging, pid 28646 - killed > > 030813 10:27:35 mysqld restarted > > Warning: Ignoring user change to 'mysql' because the user was set to 'mysql' > > earlier on the command line > > /usr/sbin/mysqld: ready for connections. > > Version: '4.0.12-log' socket: '/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock' port: 0 > > mysqld: raid.cc:160: my_off_t my_raid_seek(int, long long unsigned int, int, > > int): Assertion `pos != (~(my_off_t) 0)' failed. > > > > > > And so on... the log file was 28Kb in size. > > > > Anyone got any idea why the assertion is failing and whether the warning > > about user change needs fixing and what I need to do to fix it! And whether > > the assertion has anything to do with mysqld hanging. > > http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=346 > > Jeremy > -- > Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo! > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/ > > MySQL 4.0.13: up 12 days, processed 524,331,116 queries (481/sec. avg) > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is this a bug?
This is really not a bug. It is only a feature. Besides trimming of trailing spaces, MySQL also perform case-insensitive match. ie. SELECT 'abc' = 'ABC'; will return true. In order to turn off this feature, you should add the keyword 'binary'. Examples: SELECT binary 'abc' = 'ABC'; will return false. SELECT binary 'abc' = 'abc '; will also return false. Best regards, KH > In the last episode (Feb 21), Zhestkov Victor said: > > I have a table with varchar column and when I execute SELECT query like that: > > SELECT * FROM sometable WHERE somecolumn='abc '; it returns records which > > contain records with bo 'abc ' value, and which are only 'abc'. > > Thry this SELECT 'abc' = 'abc '; it returns true. I think it rather strange. > > I have mysql installed from Debian 3.0 r0. > > >From the docs: > >* All string columns, except `BLOB' and `TEXT' columns, automatically > have all trailing spaces removed when retrieved. For `CHAR' > types this is okay, and may be regarded as a feature according > to ANSI SQL92. The bug is that in MySQL Server, `VARCHAR' > columns are treated the same way. > > It's mentioned in 3 other places as well. > > -- > Dan Nelson > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - > Before posting, please check: >http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) >http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) > > To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To unsubscribe, e-mail > Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php -- Yours, KH Chiu C&A Computer Consultants Ltd. Tel: 3104 2070 Fax: 3010 0896 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website: www.caconsultant.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Is this a bug?
In the last episode (Feb 21), Zhestkov Victor said: > I have a table with varchar column and when I execute SELECT query like that: > SELECT * FROM sometable WHERE somecolumn='abc '; it returns records which > contain records with bo 'abc ' value, and which are only 'abc'. > Thry this SELECT 'abc' = 'abc '; it returns true. I think it rather strange. > I have mysql installed from Debian 3.0 r0. >From the docs: * All string columns, except `BLOB' and `TEXT' columns, automatically have all trailing spaces removed when retrieved. For `CHAR' types this is okay, and may be regarded as a feature according to ANSI SQL92. The bug is that in MySQL Server, `VARCHAR' columns are treated the same way. It's mentioned in 3 other places as well. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Is this a bug with comments? (fwd)
sherzodr,
Wednesday, August 21, 2002, 9:01:44 AM, you wrote:
s> If i have a single quote (') inside the /* */ comments,
s> it gives me a syntax error. Why?
Because the single quote even in the comments means that quoted string
begun:
http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/Comments.html
--
For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita
This email is sponsored by Ensita.net http://www.ensita.net/
__ ___ ___ __
/ |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Victoria Reznichenko
/ /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL AB / Ensita.net
<___/ www.mysql.com
-
Before posting, please check:
http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual)
http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive)
To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Is this a bug?
Rafal, Monday, July 08, 2002, 4:44:32 PM, you wrote: RJ> mysql version 3.23.50 RJ> Field kwData_wydania is of type date. As you can see, dates are different that RJ> expected. Is this a bug? Nope. Check the manual: You should never have any conditions in the ON part that are used to restrict which rows you have in the result set. If you want to restrict which rows should be in the result, you have to do this in the WHERE clause. Re-write you query : SELECT ksiazka_wyd.kwId,kwData_wydania FROM ksiazka_wyd LEFT JOIN serie ON ksiazka_wyd.srId=serie.srId WHERE kwData_Wydania BETWEEN '2002-07-01' AND '2002-07-31' LIMIT 5; RJ> Select ksiazka_wyd.kwId,kwData_wydania RJ> -> from ksiazka_wyd RJ> -> LEFT JOIN serie ON ksiazka_wyd.srId=serie.srId and RJ> -> kwData_Wydania RJ> -> between '2002-07-01' and '2002-07-31' RJ> -> limit 5; -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.net http://www.ensita.net/ __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Victoria Reznichenko / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL AB / Ensita.net <___/ www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Re: Is this a Bug?: Query returns an unexpected result.
Benjamin, Monday, May 20, 2002, 9:21:02 PM, you wrote: BP> On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 07:28:01PM +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: BP> [...] >> II> select >> II> o.orderid, >> II> o.shipping_date, >> II> o.cancel_date >> II> from orders o, member u >> II> where o.userid = u.userid; BP> [...] >> II> the results of the last two queries are: >> >> II> orderid shipping_date cancel_date >> II> 1 2002-05-20 21:50:24 NULL >> II> 2 2002-05-20 21:50:24 NULL >> II> orderid shipping_date cancel_date >> II> 1 2002-05-20 21:50:24 2002-05-20 21:50:24 >> >> II> in the first query, cancel_date should not be null for orderid=1. >> >> It is fixed in v4.0.2 ... BP> As the 4.0.x tree is still declared alpha, can we expect an back-port BP> of the fix to the 3.23.x tree? Sure, it's fixed in 3.23.51, too. BP> Benjamin. -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.net http://www.ensita.net/ __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Victoria Reznichenko / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL AB / Ensita.net <___/ www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Is this a Bug?: Query returns an unexpected result.
Hi. On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 02:14:26PM +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > This bug was fixed interim, as it is no longer present in 4.0.2 nor in > 3.23.51. Ah. Okay. Thanks for testing. This must be this change from 3.23.49, I guess: -- + Fixed unlikely caching bug when doing a join without keys. In this case the last used field for a table always returned NULL. -- Don't know why I missed it when I looked the first time. Sorry about the false alarm. Regards, Benjamin. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Is this a Bug?: Query returns an unexpected result.
Hi. On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 07:28:01PM +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] > II> select > II> o.orderid, > II> o.shipping_date, > II> o.cancel_date > II> from orders o, member u > II> where o.userid = u.userid; [...] > II> - > II> the results of the last two queries are: > > II> orderid shipping_date cancel_date > II> 1 2002-05-20 21:50:24 NULL > II> 2 2002-05-20 21:50:24 NULL > II> orderid shipping_date cancel_date > II> 1 2002-05-20 21:50:24 2002-05-20 21:50:24 > > II> in the first query, cancel_date should not be null for orderid=1. > > It is fixed in v4.0.2 ... As the 4.0.x tree is still declared alpha, can we expect an back-port of the fix to the 3.23.x tree? Bye, Benjamin. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Is this a Bug?: Query returns an unexpected result.
Hi.
I was able to reproduce the behaviour on MySQL 3.23.46. CC'ed to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Regards,
Benjamin.
On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 09:40:20PM +0900, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Description:
>
> Query returns an unexpected result.
>
> How-To-Repeat:
>
> run the script below:
> -
> create table member
> (
> userid int(11) primary key auto_increment,
> mailaddress char(40) not null
> );
>
> insert into member values (null,'[EMAIL PROTECTED]');
> insert into member values (null,'[EMAIL PROTECTED]');
>
> create table orders
> (
> orderid int(11) primary key auto_increment,
> userid int(11) not null,
> placedate datetime,
> status enum('WORKING','ACCEPTED','CANCELED','SHIPPED'),
> comments char(255)
> );
>
> insert into orders values (null,1,sysdate(),'ACCEPTED',null);
> insert into orders values (null,2,sysdate(),'ACCEPTED',null);
>
> alter table orders add
> (
> contact_date datetime,
> payment_date datetime,
> shipping_date datetime,
> followup_date datetime,
> cancel_date datetime
> );
>
> update orders set shipping_date=sysdate();
> update orders set cancel_date=sysdate() where orderid=1;
>
> select
> o.orderid,
> o.shipping_date,
> o.cancel_date
> from orders o, member u
> where o.userid = u.userid;
>
> select
> o.orderid,
> o.shipping_date,
> o.cancel_date
> from orders o, member u
> where o.userid = u.userid
> and o.orderid = 1;
> -
> the results of the last two queries are:
>
> orderid shipping_date cancel_date
> 1 2002-05-20 21:50:24 NULL
> 2 2002-05-20 21:50:24 NULL
> orderid shipping_date cancel_date
> 1 2002-05-20 21:50:24 2002-05-20 21:50:24
>
> in the first query, cancel_date should not be null for orderid=1.
>
>
>
> MySQL support: none
> Severity: serious
> Priority: high
> Category: mysqld
> Class:support
> Release: mysql-3.23.38
>
> Exectutable: mysqld-nt
> System:Win200
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Before posting, please check:
http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual)
http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive)
To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Is this a Bug?: Query returns an unexpected result.
Ichinichi, Monday, May 20, 2002, 3:40:20 PM, you wrote: II> Description: II> Query returns an unexpected result. II> How-To-Repeat: II> run the script below: [skip] II> select II> o.orderid, II> o.shipping_date, II> o.cancel_date II> from orders o, member u II> where o.userid = u.userid; II> select II> o.orderid, II> o.shipping_date, II> o.cancel_date II> from orders o, member u II> where o.userid = u.userid II> and o.orderid = 1; II> - II> the results of the last two queries are: II> orderid shipping_date cancel_date II> 1 2002-05-20 21:50:24 NULL II> 2 2002-05-20 21:50:24 NULL II> orderid shipping_date cancel_date II> 1 2002-05-20 21:50:24 2002-05-20 21:50:24 II> in the first query, cancel_date should not be null for orderid=1. It is fixed in v4.0.2 ... -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.net http://www.ensita.net/ __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Victoria Reznichenko / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL AB / Ensita.net <___/ www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: Is this a bug in TIMESTAMP?
* Ceferino Ortega > mysql> UPDATE prueba SET fecha2= '20020313101000' WHERE id=1; > mysql> select * from prueba; > ++++ > | id | fecha1 | fecha2 | > ++++ > | 1 | 20020313101501 | 20020313101000 | > > ++++ > > mysql> select now(); > +-+ > | now() | > +-+ > | 2002-03-13 10:15:23 | > +-+ > > Field 'fecha1' has changed to 'now()'. > Is this a bug? No, it is a feature. http://www.mysql.com/doc/D/A/DATETIME.html > In short: the first timestamp field of a table is automatically updated when the row is updated/inserted. -- Roger query - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Is this a bug?
Jeremy Zawodny writes: > On Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 12:08:22PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hi People, > > > >I'm trying to execute this Simple query: > > > > SET SQL_SAFE_MODE=0; > > > > The server doesn't like it; However, SET any other option will work fine > > except this one. > > > > I'm still using mysqld v3.23.36 . If someone can try it on the > > latest version. > > On 3.23.41: > > mysql> SET SQL_SAFE_MODE=0; > ERROR 1064: You have an error in your SQL syntax near 'SQL_SAFE_MODE=0' at line 1 > > It would seem to be documented here: > > http://www.mysql.com/doc/S/E/SET_OPTION.html > > But I can't make it work. > > Jeremy > -- > Jeremy D. Zawodny, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Technical Yahoo - Yahoo Finance > Desk: (408) 349-7878 Fax: (408) 349-5454 Cell: (408) 685-5936 > > MySQL 3.23.41-max: up 0 days, processed 3,341,714 queries (93/sec. avg) It seems to have changed into: SQL_SAFE_UPDATES We will have to fix some docs. -- Regards, __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Mr. Sinisa Milivojevic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ MySQL AB, FullTime Developer /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ Larnaca, Cyprus <___/ www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Is this a bug?
On Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 12:08:22PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi People, > >I'm trying to execute this Simple query: > > SET SQL_SAFE_MODE=0; > > The server doesn't like it; However, SET any other option will work fine > except this one. > > I'm still using mysqld v3.23.36 . If someone can try it on the > latest version. On 3.23.41: mysql> SET SQL_SAFE_MODE=0; ERROR 1064: You have an error in your SQL syntax near 'SQL_SAFE_MODE=0' at line 1 It would seem to be documented here: http://www.mysql.com/doc/S/E/SET_OPTION.html But I can't make it work. Jeremy -- Jeremy D. Zawodny, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Technical Yahoo - Yahoo Finance Desk: (408) 349-7878 Fax: (408) 349-5454 Cell: (408) 685-5936 MySQL 3.23.41-max: up 0 days, processed 3,341,714 queries (93/sec. avg) - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: IS THIS A BUG?
I much prefer the current behavior, our customers have no access to the local host and anyone trying to gain access from the local host with a sniffed password and account would fail. I am mildly paranoid, but it gives me comfort (however unjust). Ken - Ken Menzel ICQ# 9325188 www.icarz.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] > I think the intention of the '%' is to use something like: '%.eliteukserve.net'. > > I see your logic though. One would assume it should work. Interesting... > > - Original Message - > > We wanted users to be able to connect to a particular db remotely. Which > > would mean we would have to change their host to "%" This worked fine, but > > when we did that, we could not connect locally. In order to connect locally, > > we to create another user with the host value of localhost to get into the > > db. I took "%" to mean from ANY host??? Am I mistaken or is this a bug? > > > > Version mysql : 3.22.33 > > Linux Version : Cobalt 6.0 (RH 6.0) > > > > Dave Carter > > Chief Web Architect > > Accelerated Business Technologies, Inc. > > http://www.abti.cc > > 717.464.2970 - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: IS THIS A BUG?
At 9:50 AM -0400 5/17/01, Dave Carter wrote: >We wanted users to be able to connect to a particular db remotely. Which >would mean we would have to change their host to "%" This worked fine, but >when we did that, we could not connect locally. In order to connect locally, >we to create another user with the host value of localhost to get into the >db. I took "%" to mean from ANY host??? Am I mistaken or is this a bug? Not a bug, but it's a confusing scenario that happens often. Check to see if you have any anonymous-user entries in the user table (entries with the empty string in the user column: SELECT * FROM user WHERE user = ''). If do, delete them and FLUSH PRIVILEGES. If you have my book, this is explained in "A Privilege Puzzle, Part I", page 429, and "A Privilege Puzzle, Part II", pages 464-465. > >Version mysql : 3.22.33 >Linux Version : Cobalt 6.0 (RH 6.0) > >Dave Carter >Chief Web Architect >Accelerated Business Technologies, Inc. >http://www.abti.cc >717.464.2970 > > >- >Before posting, please check: >http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) >http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) > >To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php -- Paul DuBois, [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: IS THIS A BUG?
I think the intention of the '%' is to use something like: '%.eliteukserve.net'. I see your logic though. One would assume it should work. Interesting... - Original Message - From: "Dave Carter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 2:50 PM Subject: IS THIS A BUG? > We wanted users to be able to connect to a particular db remotely. Which > would mean we would have to change their host to "%" This worked fine, but > when we did that, we could not connect locally. In order to connect locally, > we to create another user with the host value of localhost to get into the > db. I took "%" to mean from ANY host??? Am I mistaken or is this a bug? > > Version mysql : 3.22.33 > Linux Version : Cobalt 6.0 (RH 6.0) > > Dave Carter > Chief Web Architect > Accelerated Business Technologies, Inc. > http://www.abti.cc > 717.464.2970 > > > - > Before posting, please check: >http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) >http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) > > To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To unsubscribe, e-mail ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php > - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Is this a bug?
Never mind; thanks for the pointers to TFM... =) The updated, working query looks like this: TO_DAYS(NOW()) - TO_DAYS(customers.last_mod) > 14 Thanks all! On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, Chris Harshman wrote: > At the first of the month (no changes made to the database; this script is > just running SELECT statements at present) the number of rows returned by > this query dropped noticeably. Is this a bug, is my query just fubar'd, > or...? > > SELECT account.username AS account_username, customers.username AS > customers_username, account.accout_no, account.email, customers.last_mod > FROM account LEFT JOIN customers ON account.username = customers.username > WHERE (customers.username IS NULL OR customers.username LIKE > \"%_expired\") OR (customers.last_mod <= current_date() - 14 AND > customers.access_status = 'D') ORDER BY last_mod"; > > The number of rows returned: > 4/10 253 > 4/9 247 > 4/8 243 > 4/7 241 > 4/6 234 > 4/5 226 > 4/4 221 > 4/3 216 > 4/2 207 > 4/1 197 > 3/31 333 > 3/30 312 > > > Thanks! > > > > - > Before posting, please check: >http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) >http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) > > To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php > - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Is this a bug?
This is one of the things I'd like to see changed in mysql someday. Date math has never worked well because it represents dates as numbers -- sort of. What I'd like to have is the capability to do is -- select datetimefield2 - datetimefield1 as timediff which would save a lot of hassle over the current solution of -- select unix_timestamp(datetimefield2) - unix_timestamp(datetimefield1) as timediff It just seems a little more intuitive than the DATE_ set of functions. René Tegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: you try to select the march 87. 2001 ;) read the manual about date/time conversion and math: mysql> select current_date(), current_date()-0, current_date()-14; | current_date() | current_date()-0 | current_date()-14 | | 2001-04-12 | 20010412 | 20010398 | 1 row in set (0.00 sec) gl - Original Message - From: "Chris Harshman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 8:32 PM Subject: Is this a bug? > At the first of the month (no changes made to the database; this script is > just running SELECT statements at present) the number of rows returned by > this query dropped noticeably. Is this a bug, is my query just fubar'd, > or...? > > SELECT account.username AS account_username, customers.username AS > customers_username, account.accout_no, account.email, customers.last_mod > FROM account LEFT JOIN customers ON account.username = customers.username > WHERE (customers.username IS NULL OR customers.username LIKE > \"%_expired\") OR (customers.last_mod <= current_date() - 14 AND > customers.access_status = 'D') ORDER BY last_mod"; > - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Is this a bug?
you try to select the march 87. 2001 ;) read the manual about date/time conversion and math: mysql> select current_date(), current_date()-0, current_date()-14; | current_date() | current_date()-0 | current_date()-14 | | 2001-04-12 | 20010412 | 20010398 | 1 row in set (0.00 sec) gl - Original Message - From: "Chris Harshman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 8:32 PM Subject: Is this a bug? > At the first of the month (no changes made to the database; this script is > just running SELECT statements at present) the number of rows returned by > this query dropped noticeably. Is this a bug, is my query just fubar'd, > or...? > > SELECT account.username AS account_username, customers.username AS > customers_username, account.accout_no, account.email, customers.last_mod > FROM account LEFT JOIN customers ON account.username = customers.username > WHERE (customers.username IS NULL OR customers.username LIKE > \"%_expired\") OR (customers.last_mod <= current_date() - 14 AND > customers.access_status = 'D') ORDER BY last_mod"; > > The number of rows returned: > 4/10 253 > 4/9 247 > 4/8 243 > 4/7 241 > 4/6 234 > 4/5 226 > 4/4 221 > 4/3 216 > 4/2 207 > 4/1 197 > 3/31 333 > 3/30 312 > > > Thanks! > > > > - > Before posting, please check: >http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) >http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) > > To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php > - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
