1. 29 May, 2018 10 commits
  2. 28 May, 2018 9 commits
  3. 27 May, 2018 4 commits
  4. 26 May, 2018 11 commits
  5. 25 May, 2018 4 commits
    • Sergei Golubchik's avatar
      embedded use-after-free ASAN error · 9e22cae1
      Sergei Golubchik authored
      Close MYSQL (and destroy THD) in the same thread where it was used,
      because THD embeds MDL_context, that owns some LF_PINS, that remember
      a pointer to my_thread_var->stack_ends_here.
      9e22cae1
    • Andrei Elkin's avatar
      MDEV-13727 top-level query timestamp reset at stored func/trigger internal statements · 3bbc30c7
      Andrei Elkin authored
      Being executed under slow_log is ON the test revealed a "side-effect"
      in MDEV-8305 implementation which inadvertently made the trigger or
      stored function statements to reset the top-level query's
      THD::start_time et al. (Details of the test failure analysis are footnoted).
      Unlike the SP case the SF and Trigger's internal statement should not
      do that.
      
      Fixed with revising the MDEV-8305 decision to backup/reset/restore
      the session timestamp inside sp_instr_stmt::execute(). The timestamp
      actually remains reset in the SP case by its caller per statement basis by ever
      existing logics.
      
      Timestamps related tests are extended to cover the trigger and stored function case.
      
      Note, commit 3395ab73 is reverted as its struct QUERY_START_TIME_INFO
      declaration is not in use anymore after this patch.
      
      Footnote:
      --------
      Specifically to the failing test, a query on the master was logged
      okay with a timestamp of the query's top-level statement but its post
      update trigger managed to compute one more (later) timestamp which got
      inserted into another table. The latter table master-vs-slave
      no fractional part timestamp discrepancy became evident
      thanks to different execution time of the trigger combined with the
      fact of the logged with micro-second fractional part master timestamp
      was truncated on the slave. On master when the fractional part was
      close to 1 the trigger execution added up its own latency to overflow
      to next second value. That's how the master timestamp surprisingly
      turned out to bigger than the slave's one.
      3bbc30c7
    • Marko Mäkelä's avatar
      Make a test independent of VERSION · 83ec8c88
      Marko Mäkelä authored
      83ec8c88
    • Daniel Bartholomew's avatar
      bump the VERSION · c86ea540
      Daniel Bartholomew authored
      c86ea540
  6. 24 May, 2018 2 commits