Hi!
On Jul 03, Ramil Kalimullin wrote:
>
> Thanks for the review.
> Could you please look at the proposed changes bellow?
Two comments:
> ===== storage/csv/ha_tina.cc 1.79 vs edited =====
> --- 1.79/storage/csv/ha_tina.cc 2007-07-03 13:14:39 +05:00
> +++ edited/storage/csv/ha_tina.cc 2007-07-03 12:56:31 +05:00
> @@ -45,8 +45,6 @@ TODO:
> #pragma implementation // gcc: Class implementation
> #endif
>
> -#define MYSQL_SERVER 1
> -
> #include "mysql_priv.h"
> #include <mysql/plugin.h>
> #include "ha_tina.h"
> @@ -587,6 +585,7 @@ int ha_tina::chain_append()
> */
> int ha_tina::find_current_row(uchar *buf)
> {
> + THD *thd= ha_thd();
> off_t end_offset, curr_offset= current_position;
> int eoln_len;
> my_bitmap_map *org_bitmap;
> @@ -679,6 +678,7 @@ int ha_tina::find_current_row(uchar *buf
> goto err;
> }
> }
> + thd_inc_row_count(thd);
This looks wrong. You'll interfere with the thd->row_count counter that
is used for INSERT, UPDATE, LOAD, etc.
You only can do it in repair and check.
> next_position= end_offset + eoln_len;
> error= 0;
>
> @@ -1014,7 +1014,7 @@ int ha_tina::rnd_init(bool scan)
> stats.records= 0;
> records_is_known= 0;
> chain_ptr= chain;
> - thd->count_cuted_fields= CHECK_FIELD_WARN; // To find wrong values
> + thd_field_check_level(thd, CHECK_FIELD_WARN); // To find wrong values
You know, I'm thinking now that you were right and
field->store(..., CHECK_FIELD_WARN)
is a better approach. Same reason as above - side effects. If it's set
once, it'll affect not only field->store() call in ha_tina.cc, but also,
possibly, many unrelated places in the server, and we don't want it, do
we ?
Regards / Mit vielen Grüssen,
Sergei
--
__ ___ ___ ____ __
/ |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ / Sergei Golubchik <serg@stripped>
/ /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ Principal Software Developer
/_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL GmbH, Radlkoferstr. 2, D-81373 München
<___/ Geschäftsführer: Kaj Arnö - HRB
München 162140
