Re: [Maria-developers] 1ee6b0ff748: MDEV-11115 CHECK constraints are not shown in I_S.TABLE_CONSTRAINTS
Hi, jacob.mathew! On Mar 16, jacob.mathew@mariadb.com wrote:
revision-id: 1ee6b0ff74858dccd779c7974858c6d084c1cde5 (mariadb-10.2.3-246-g1ee6b0ff748) parent(s): 9f33288dde950343c46e6c5d6a4f233de191f477 author: Jacob Mathew committer: Jacob Mathew timestamp: 2017-03-16 18:31:11 -0700 message:
MDEV-11115 CHECK constraints are not shown in I_S.TABLE_CONSTRAINTS
Fixed handling of column-level CHECK constraints in I_S.TABLE_CONSTRAINTS. Fixed a bug regarding virtual column definitions whose name is the field name. Fixed column-level CHECK constraint syntax in the test case.
Ah, good. I had a feeling there was something wrong with field-level constraints in your first patch. This looks great now. Did you push it into a stage tree already? Like bb-10.2-jacob or something? If not - please do. If you did and buildbot didn't show anything bad, please squash your three commits into one, rebase it on top of the current 10.2 and push. Thanks! Regards, Sergei Chief Architect MariaDB and security@mariadb.org
Hi Sergei, Both the changes for this bug and the changes for MDEV-10355 are in a stage tree named bb-10.2-<bug number>. However, when I look at the automated testing on their respective branches, I see a few failures. As far as I can tell, none of the failures could have been caused by my changes To give meaning to these results, I need a baseline for comparison for each branch. The respective baselines would be from just before I cloned each branch. Since I don't have those, I don't have any baselines for comparison, and so the test results are meaningless. How would you suggest I proceed? I'm going to sleep right now. I'll check email again when I wake up before the weekly call. Thanks, Jacob Jacob B. Mathew Senior Software Engineer MariaDB Corporation +1 408 655 8999 (mobile) jacob.b.mathew (Skype) jacob.mathew@MariaDB.com On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 3:42 AM, Sergei Golubchik <serg@mariadb.org> wrote:
Hi, jacob.mathew!
On Mar 16, jacob.mathew@mariadb.com wrote:
revision-id: 1ee6b0ff74858dccd779c7974858c6d084c1cde5 (mariadb-10.2.3-246-g1ee6b0ff748) parent(s): 9f33288dde950343c46e6c5d6a4f233de191f477 author: Jacob Mathew committer: Jacob Mathew timestamp: 2017-03-16 18:31:11 -0700 message:
MDEV-11115 CHECK constraints are not shown in I_S.TABLE_CONSTRAINTS
Fixed handling of column-level CHECK constraints in I_S.TABLE_CONSTRAINTS. Fixed a bug regarding virtual column definitions whose name is the field name. Fixed column-level CHECK constraint syntax in the test case.
Ah, good. I had a feeling there was something wrong with field-level constraints in your first patch.
This looks great now. Did you push it into a stage tree already? Like bb-10.2-jacob or something? If not - please do. If you did and buildbot didn't show anything bad, please squash your three commits into one, rebase it on top of the current 10.2 and push.
Thanks!
Regards, Sergei Chief Architect MariaDB and security@mariadb.org
Hi Jacob, The branch bb-10.2-MDEV-11115 appears to be based on an ancient version of 10.2: commit e1f0f0dd06d5e6f606c962b09ab0f6c0f1197955 Author: Sergei Golubchik <serg@mariadb.org> Date: Mon Feb 13 18:37:06 2017 +0100 In my opinion, when you push something for BuildBot testing, the base should be reasonably new (I would say not more than a few days old). There have been numerous changes to 10.2 in the past month, and it is also possible that rebasing to current 10.2 could cause conflicts or failures in recently added or modified tests. I do not know how to find the test failures for that above-mentioned 10.2 revision. The view http://buildbot.askmonty.org/buildbot/grid?category=main&branch=10.2 only displays the results of the latest 5 pushes that Buildbot has sampled, and there is no obvious way of going to ‘previous page’. Best regards, Marko
Hi, Jacob! On Mar 20, Jacob Mathew wrote:
Hi Sergei,
Both the changes for this bug and the changes for MDEV-10355 are in a stage tree named bb-10.2-<bug number>. However, when I look at the automated testing on their respective branches, I see a few failures. As far as I can tell, none of the failures could have been caused by my changes To give meaning to these results, I need a baseline for comparison for each branch. The respective baselines would be from just before I cloned each branch. Since I don't have those, I don't have any baselines for comparison, and so the test results are meaningless. How would you suggest I proceed?
You'll need to squash your commits (both for this bug and the changes for MDEV-10355) and rebase on top of 10.2 anyway. Why not do it now? When you push the rebased bugfix back into your bb-10.2-<bug number> branch you'll have 10.2 as a baseline. Regards, Sergei Chief Architect MariaDB and security@mariadb.org
The biggest problem I have is that before MariaDB, I have no prior experience using git. There is also no one here in Menlo Park who is a git expert. Jacob Jacob B. Mathew Senior Software Engineer MariaDB Corporation +1 408 655 8999 (mobile) jacob.b.mathew (Skype) jacob.mathew@MariaDB.com On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 12:11 AM, Sergei Golubchik <serg@mariadb.org> wrote:
Hi, Jacob!
On Mar 20, Jacob Mathew wrote:
Hi Sergei,
Both the changes for this bug and the changes for MDEV-10355 are in a stage tree named bb-10.2-<bug number>. However, when I look at the automated testing on their respective branches, I see a few failures. As far as I can tell, none of the failures could have been caused by my changes To give meaning to these results, I need a baseline for comparison for each branch. The respective baselines would be from just before I cloned each branch. Since I don't have those, I don't have any baselines for comparison, and so the test results are meaningless. How would you suggest I proceed?
You'll need to squash your commits (both for this bug and the changes for MDEV-10355) and rebase on top of 10.2 anyway.
Why not do it now? When you push the rebased bugfix back into your bb-10.2-<bug number> branch you'll have 10.2 as a baseline.
Regards, Sergei Chief Architect MariaDB and security@mariadb.org
participants (3)
-
Jacob Mathew -
Marko Mäkelä -
Sergei Golubchik