It is actually a 512 MB DDR3-RAM Geforce card - but it hardly matters, I think. --Peter

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Justin Swanhart <greenlion@gmail.com> wrote:

After you debug you proc you kinda have to replace the non buggy one.  In production.  While people are using it.  Unless you version your whole code base and push out a new version to use a new name.

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 3, 2015, at 6:22 AM, Peter Laursen <peter_laursen@webyog.com> wrote:

If this "You can't drop a busy proc in production to replace it" was for me,  then note the passage from my blog:

"you can add a IN-parameter (debug: integer) to a Stored Procedure paramer-list and CALL mysp(….,0|1) what would then control if the stored program should enter or bypass debugging code when executing". This is the best workaround I've found.  

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:17 PM, Justin Swanhart <greenlion@gmail.com> wrote:

You can't drop a busy proc in production to replace it.  Many users would get an error.  This is the same reason views have had CoR for so long. So yes it is a big deal!

Anyway, what I want most are Antony Curtis' stored proc / parser changes (mdev 820 if I'm not mistaken).  I am especially interested in table functions and external stored routines.

I'd also like to discuss window functions too.  I've implemented them in shard-query and have ideas about how to implement them in the server, but pluggable parser would be really useful here.

--Justin

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 3, 2015, at 2:48 AM, Sergei Golubchik <serg@mariadb.org> wrote:
>
> Hi, Federico!
>
>> On Mar 03, Federico Razzoli wrote:
>> Reading 10.0.3 release notes:
>>
>> https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/mariadb-1013-release-notes/
>>
>> I see that IF EXISTS, IF NOT EXISTS and OR REPLACE are now almost
>> consistent. "Almost" means that... OR REPLACE still doesn't apply to
>> stored procedures, functions, triggers, events.
>
> Support for events is already pushed (albeit after 10.1.3).
> Support for triggers will be pushed any day now (already reviewed and
> approved, so there's no more work left on it). I suppose that stored
> procedures and functions will follow soon.
>
> This was a GSoC 2014 project that added support for these clauses to
> *all* objects. It's just being pushed piecewise, object by object.
>
>> Recently, during a public session, a PostgreSQL user asked me if
>> MariaDB supports stored procedures - in his opinion, MySQL doesn't, no
>> matter what the manual says. Unfortunately my answer was that MariaDB
>> support for stored procedure is the same as MySQL ("so the answer is
>> no", he said).
>
> I don't understand what exactly missing feature that user had in mind.
> It couldn't have been "CREATE OR REPLACE", this seems so minor.
> Or was it?
>
> Regards,
> Sergei
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss
> Post to     : maria-discuss@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss
Post to     : maria-discuss@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp