- 04 May, 2006 14 commits
-
-
jani@ua141d10.elisa.omakaista.fi authored
-
jani@ua141d10.elisa.omakaista.fi authored
into ua141d10.elisa.omakaista.fi:/home/my/bk/mysql-5.0
-
jani@ua141d10.elisa.omakaista.fi authored
into ua141d10.elisa.omakaista.fi:/home/my/bk/mysql-5.0
-
jani@ua141d10.elisa.omakaista.fi authored
is only to make sure that this will not be fixed, as it is intended behaviour. Documentation will be improved accordingly.
-
igor@rurik.mysql.com authored
into rurik.mysql.com:/home/igor/dev/mysql-5.0-0
-
svoj@april.(none) authored
-
jani@hundin.mysql.fi authored
into hundin.mysql.fi:/home/jani/mysql-4.1
-
tnurnberg@mysql.com authored
into mysql.com:/home/mysql-4.1-19025e
-
holyfoot@mysql.com authored
into mysql.com:/home/hf/work/mysql-5.0.mrg
-
holyfoot@mysql.com authored
into mysql.com:/home/hf/work/mysql-5.0.mrg
-
holyfoot@deer.(none) authored
-
igor@rurik.mysql.com authored
-
igor@rurik.mysql.com authored
into rurik.mysql.com:/home/igor/dev/mysql-5.0-0
-
tnurnberg@mysql.com authored
mysqldump / SHOW CREATE TABLE will show the NEXT available value for the PK, rather than the *first* one that was available (that named in the original CREATE TABLE ... AUTO_INCREMENT = ... statement). This should produce correct and robust behaviour for the obvious use cases -- when no data were inserted, then we'll produce a statement featuring the same value the original CREATE TABLE had; if we dump with values, INSERTing the values on the target machine should set the correct next_ID anyway (and if not, we'll still have our AUTO_INCREMENT = ... to do that). Lastly, just the CREATE statement (with no data) for a table that saw inserts would still result in a table that new values could safely be inserted to). There seems to be no robust way however to see whether the next_ID field is > 1 because it was set to something else with CREATE TABLE ... AUTO_INCREMENT = ..., or because there is an AUTO_INCREMENT column in the table (but no initial value was set with AUTO_INCREMENT = ...) and then one or more rows were INSERTed, counting up next_ID. This means that in both cases, we'll generate an AUTO_INCREMENT = ... clause in SHOW CREATE TABLE / mysqldump. As we also show info on, say, charsets even if the user did not explicitly give that info in their own CREATE TABLE, this shouldn't be an issue. As per above, the next_ID will be affected by any INSERTs that have taken place, though. This /should/ result in correct and robust behaviour, but it may look non-intuitive to some users if they CREATE TABLE ... AUTO_INCREMENT = 1000 and later (after some INSERTs) have SHOW CREATE TABLE give them a different value (say, CREATE TABLE ... AUTO_INCREMENT = 1006), so the docs should possibly feature a caveat to that effect. It's not very intuitive the way it works now (with the fix), but it's *correct*. We're not storing the original value anyway, if we wanted that, we'd have to change on-disk representation? If we do dump/load cycles with empty DBs, nothing will change. This changeset includes an additional test case that proves that tables with rows will create the same next_ID for AUTO_INCREMENT = ... across dump/restore cycles. Confirmed by support as likely solution for client's problem.
-
- 03 May, 2006 22 commits
-
-
svojtovich@production.mysql.com authored
into production.mysql.com:/usersnfs/svojtovich/mysql-5.0
-
holyfoot@mysql.com authored
into mysql.com:/home/hf/work/mysql-5.0.mrg
-
pekka@mysql.com authored
into mysql.com:/space/pekka/ndb/version/my50
-
aivanov@mysql.com authored
into mysql.com:/home/alexi/innodb/mysql-5.0-ss521
-
aivanov@mysql.com authored
Fixed BUG#19366: "consistent_snapshot.test fails".
-
holyfoot@mysql.com authored
into mysql.com:/home/hf/work/mysql-4.1.mrg
-
aivanov@mysql.com authored
into mysql.com:/home/alexi/innodb/mysql-4.1-ss26
-
aivanov@mysql.com authored
into mysql.com:/home/alexi/innodb/mysql-5.0-ss521-work Null-merge.
-
aivanov@mysql.com authored
Fixed BUG#19366: "consistent_snapshot.test fails".
-
holyfoot@mysql.com authored
into mysql.com:/home/hf/work/mysql-4.1.mrg
-
holyfoot@deer.(none) authored
-
holyfoot@deer.(none) authored
-
holyfoot@mysql.com authored
into mysql.com:/home/hf/work/mysql-5.0.mrg
-
holyfoot@mysql.com authored
-
holyfoot@mysql.com authored
-
svoj@april.(none) authored
into april.(none):/home/svoj/devel/mysql/BUG17810/mysql-5.0
-
svoj@april.(none) authored
into april.(none):/home/svoj/devel/mysql/BUG17810/mysql-5.0
-
holyfoot@mysql.com authored
-
holyfoot@mysql.com authored
into mysql.com:/home/hf/work/mysql-4.1.mrg
-
holyfoot@mysql.com authored
into mysql.com:/home/hf/work/mysql-4.1.mrg
-
holyfoot@mysql.com authored
into mysql.com:/home/hf/work/mysql-4.1.mrg
-
igor@rurik.mysql.com authored
This performance degradation was due to the fact that some cost evaluation code added into 4.1 in the function find_best was not merged into the code of the function best_access_path added together with other code for greedy optimizer. Added a parameter to the function print_plan. The parameter contains accumulated cost for a given partial join. The patch does not include a special test case since this performance degradation is hard to reproduse with a simple example. TODO: make the function find_best use the function best_access_path in order to remove duplication of code which might result in incomplete merges in the future.
-
- 02 May, 2006 4 commits
-
-
pekka@mysql.com authored
-
cmiller@zippy.(none) authored
into zippy.(none):/home/cmiller/work/mysql/mysql-5.0__bug17667
-
cmiller@zippy.(none) authored
our sprintf()-alike in sync with our fprintf()-alike features.
-
dlenev@mysql.com authored
into mysql.com:/home/dlenev/mysql-5.0-bg11081
-