1. 21 Oct, 2012 3 commits
  2. 19 Oct, 2012 4 commits
  3. 18 Oct, 2012 4 commits
    • Neeraj Bisht's avatar
      Bug#13726751 - 8 BYTE MEMORY LEAK IN DO_SAVE_BLOB · 44beb951
      Neeraj Bisht authored
      Problem:-
      When we execute a query which has subquery with GROUP BY, ORDER BY and have a
      BLOB column,results a memory leak.
      
      Analysis:-
      In case of subquery, which have GROUP BY on BLOB and a ORDER BY on other field
      and BLOB is not a key. We allocate a tmp buffer to copy_field to take care of
      BLOB value.This copy_field value can have copies of its in two join(objects),
      so while freeing this copy_field we have to take care that it is
      not deleted twice.
      The double deletion of tmp_table_param.copy_field is handled by two patches.
      
      One by Kostja :
      revid:sp1r-konstantin@mysql.com-20050627101056-55153
      Fix the broken test suite in -debug build.
      
      and other by Oleksandr
      revid:sp1r-bell@sanja.is.com.ua-20060118114857-19905
      Excluded posibility of tmp_table_param.copy_field double deletion (BUG#14851).
      
      both of this patches are commited in different branch and while
      merging they both get placed,but there is no need for Kostja patch as Oleksandr
      patch handle this.
      
      
      sql/sql_select.cc:
        Bug13726751, tmp_join clean up is not necessary as later in the code we are taking care of cleaning up of tmp_join copy_field.
      44beb951
    • Neeraj Bisht's avatar
      Bug#13726751 - 8 BYTE MEMORY LEAK IN DO_SAVE_BLOB · eef1a195
      Neeraj Bisht authored
      Problem:-
      When we execute a query which has subquery with GROUP BY, ORDER BY and have a
      BLOB column,results a memory leak.
      
      Analysis:-
      In case of subquery, which have GROUP BY on BLOB and a ORDER BY on other field
      and BLOB is not a key. We allocate a tmp buffer to copy_field to take care of
      BLOB value.This copy_field value can have copies of its in two join(objects),
      so while freeing this copy_field we have to take care that it is
      not deleted twice.
      The double deletion of tmp_table_param.copy_field is handled by two patches.
      
      One by Kostja :
      revid:sp1r-konstantin@mysql.com-20050627101056-55153
      Fix the broken test suite in -debug build.
      
      and other by Oleksandr
      revid:sp1r-bell@sanja.is.com.ua-20060118114857-19905
      Excluded posibility of tmp_table_param.copy_field double deletion (BUG#14851).
      
      both of this patches are commited in different branch and while
      merging they both get placed,but there is no need for Kostja patch as Oleksandr
      patch handle this.
      
      
      sql/sql_select.cc:
        Bug13726751, tmp_join clean up is not necessary as later in the code we are taking care of cleaning up of tmp_join copy_field.
      eef1a195
    • Marko Mäkelä's avatar
      Merge mysql-5.1 to mysql-5.5. · f9389d58
      Marko Mäkelä authored
      f9389d58
    • Marko Mäkelä's avatar
      Bug#14758405: ALTER TABLE: ADDING SERIAL NULL DATATYPE: ASSERTION: · 52ea1522
      Marko Mäkelä authored
      LEN <= SIZEOF(ULONGLONG)
      
      This bug was caught in the WL#6255 ALTER TABLE...ADD COLUMN in MySQL
      5.6, but there is a bug in all InnoDB versions that support
      auto-increment columns.
      
      row_search_autoinc_read_column(): When reading the maximum value of
      the auto-increment column, and the column only contains NULL values,
      return 0. This corresponds to the case when the table is empty in
      row_search_max_autoinc().
      
      rb:1415 approved by Sunny Bains
      52ea1522
  4. 17 Oct, 2012 9 commits
  5. 16 Oct, 2012 5 commits
    • Neeraj Bisht's avatar
      Bug#11745891 - LAST_INSERT(ID) DOES NOT SUPPORT BIGINT UNSIGNED · 510d048b
      Neeraj Bisht authored
      Problem:-
      using last_insert_id() on an auto_incremented bigint unsigned does
      not work for values which are greater than max-bigint-signed.
      
      Analysis:-
      last_insert_id() returns the first auto_incremented value for a column
      and an auto_incremented value can have only positive values.
      
      In our code, when we are initializing a last_insert_id object, we are
      taking it as a signed BIGINT, So when the auto_incremented value reaches
      greater than max signed bigint, last_insert_id gives negative result.
      
      Solution:
      When we are fetching the value from last_insert_id, We are setting the 
      unsigned_flag, so that it take only unsigned BIGINT value.
      
      sql/item_func.cc:
        here unsigned value is converted to signed value.
      sql/item_func.h:
        last_insert_id() gives an auto_incremented value which can be
        positive only,so defined it as a unsigned longlong sets the
        unsigned_flag to 1.
      510d048b
    • Neeraj Bisht's avatar
      Bug#11745891 - LAST_INSERT(ID) DOES NOT SUPPORT BIGINT UNSIGNED · bdb4104c
      Neeraj Bisht authored
      Problem:-
      using last_insert_id() on an auto_incremented bigint unsigned does
      not work for values which are greater than max-bigint-signed.
      
      Analysis:-
      last_insert_id() returns the first auto_incremented value for a column
      and an auto_incremented value can have only positive values.
      
      In our code, when we are initializing a last_insert_id object, we are
      taking it as a signed BIGINT, So when the auto_incremented value reaches
      greater than max signed bigint, last_insert_id gives negative result.
      
      Solution:
      When we are fetching the value from last_insert_id, We are setting the 
      unsigned_flag, so that it take only unsigned BIGINT value.
      
      sql/item_func.cc:
        here unsigned value is converted to signed value.
      sql/item_func.h:
        last_insert_id() gives an auto_incremented value which can be
        positive only,so defined it as a unsigned longlong sets the
        unsigned_flag to 1.
      bdb4104c
    • unknown's avatar
      No commit message · 5f37d738
      unknown authored
      No commit message
      5f37d738
    • Marko Mäkelä's avatar
      Merge mysql-5.1 to mysql-5.5. · bb371b64
      Marko Mäkelä authored
      bb371b64
    • Marko Mäkelä's avatar
      Bug#14729221 IN-PLACE ALTER TABLE REPORTS '' INSTEAD OF · aec62476
      Marko Mäkelä authored
      REAL DUPLICATE VALUE FOR PREFIX KEYS
      
      innobase_rec_to_mysql(): Invoke dict_index_get_nth_col_or_prefix_pos()
      instead of dict_index_get_nth_col_pos() to find the column.
      aec62476
  6. 15 Oct, 2012 3 commits
    • Krunal Bauskar krunal.bauskar@oracle.com's avatar
      removed warning message as they have changed in mysql-5.6 and mysql-trunk and... · 04c77300
      removed warning message as they have changed in mysql-5.6 and mysql-trunk and this is left over from changes that got up-merged 
      04c77300
    • Krunal Bauskar krunal.bauskar@oracle.com's avatar
      · ed6732dd
      bug#14704286
      SECONDARY INDEX UPDATES MAKE CONSISTENT READS DO O(N^2) UNDO PAGE
      LOOKUPS (honoring kill query while accessing sec_index)
      
      If secondary index is being used for select query evaluation and this
      query is operating with consistent read snapshot it might take good time for
      secondary index to return back control to mysql as MVCC would kick in.
      
      If user issues "kill query <id>" while query is actively accessing
      secondary index it will not be honored as there is no hook to check
      for this condition. Added hook for this check.
      
      -----
      Parallely secondary index taking too long to evaluate for consistent
      read snapshot case is being examined for performance improvement. WL#6540.
      ed6732dd
    • Krunal Bauskar krunal.bauskar@oracle.com's avatar
      · 9bfc910f
      bug#14704286
      SECONDARY INDEX UPDATES MAKE CONSISTENT READS DO O(N^2) UNDO PAGE
      LOOKUPS (honoring kill query while accessing sec_index)
      
      If secondary index is being used for select query evaluation and this
      query is operating with consistent read snapshot it might take good time for
      secondary index to return back control to mysql as MVCC would kick in.
      
      If user issues "kill query <id>" while query is actively accessing
      secondary index it will not be honored as there is no hook to check
      for this condition. Added hook for this check.
      
      -----
      Parallely secondary index taking too long to evaluate for consistent
      read snapshot case is being examined for performance improvement. WL#6540.
      9bfc910f
  7. 12 Oct, 2012 4 commits
  8. 10 Oct, 2012 2 commits
  9. 09 Oct, 2012 6 commits