On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 02:55:17PM +1200, Quentin Bennett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> To be fair to the anonymous writer, the main reason for introducing
> 3.23.25 was
>
> Changes in release 3.23.35
> --
>
>* Fixed newly introduce bug in `ORDER BY'.
>
> Nothing there about 'i
grade or not upgrade' decision.
JM2c
Quentin
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy D. Zawodny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, 19 March 2001 11:47 a.m.
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Greg Cope
Subject: Re: MySQL 3.23.35 is released
On Sun, Mar 18,
On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 03:31:47PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On 17-Mar-2001 Jeremy D. Zawodny wrote:
>
> >> Er. Is there any way you guys can actually form a stable branch,
> >> and a development branch? It would be nice to get a stable
> >> version of mysql with replication, and that
On 17-Mar-2001 Jeremy D. Zawodny wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 06:56:34AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> On 17-Mar-2001 Greg Cope wrote:
>> > Michael Widenius wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Greg> On the off chance any ideas when this (A Gemini THandler) 3.23.x
>> >> releas
On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 11:51:39AM +, Peter Skipworth wrote:
> I'd love to see some benchmarks soonish if anyone has/is about to
> compare each of the table handlers for speed and
> stability. Personally I'd love to have row-level locking, but don't
> want to do it if it means lower stability
I'd love to see some benchmarks soonish if anyone has/is about to
compare each of the table handlers for speed and stability. Personally I'd
love to have row-level locking, but don't want to do it if it means
lower stability and/or slower basic select/insert queries.
regards,
P
On Sat, 17 Mar
2
On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 12:53:50PM -0800, Patrick Calkins wrote:
> Hello all;
>
> Sorry to sound a little naive, but what is this new GEMINI thing I
> have been reading about? Is there any FAQ/Docs on it or what is so
> neet about it??
It is a new table handler which is being developed by the fol
ROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 4:24 PM
Subject: Re: MySQL 3.23.35 is released
> Michael Widenius wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> >
> > Greg> On the off chance any ideas when this (A Gemini THandler) 3.23.x
release
> > Greg> may be and when we
On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 06:56:34AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On 17-Mar-2001 Greg Cope wrote:
> > Michael Widenius wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >>
> >> Greg> On the off chance any ideas when this (A Gemini THandler) 3.23.x
> >> release
> >> Greg> may be and when we might see a public 4
On 17-Mar-2001 Greg Cope wrote:
> Michael Widenius wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>>
>> Greg> On the off chance any ideas when this (A Gemini THandler) 3.23.x
>> release
>> Greg> may be and when we might see a public 4.x alpha. I know the answer
>> will
>> Greg> probably be "When its ready" but a small
Michael Widenius wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
>
> Greg> On the off chance any ideas when this (A Gemini THandler) 3.23.x release
> Greg> may be and when we might see a public 4.x alpha. I know the answer will
> Greg> probably be "When its ready" but a small clue would be nice :-)
>
> Lets guess a bit :)
Hi!
> "Greg" == Greg Cope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Greg> Michael Widenius wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> The 3.23.35 mainly fixes a critical bug in 3.23.34 with ORDER BY. We
>> don't know how the ORDER BY bug slipped through our testing suite or
>> how fatal it's really is, but as we have got
Michael Widenius wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> The 3.23.35 mainly fixes a critical bug in 3.23.34 with ORDER BY. We
> don't know how the ORDER BY bug slipped through our testing suite or
> how fatal it's really is, but as we have got a couple of reports about
> core dumps regarding this, we recommend 3.23
Hi!
The 3.23.35 mainly fixes a critical bug in 3.23.34 with ORDER BY. We
don't know how the ORDER BY bug slipped through our testing suite or
how fatal it's really is, but as we have got a couple of reports about
core dumps regarding this, we recommend 3.23.34 users to
upgrade as soon as possib
14 matches
Mail list logo
