#At file:///stuff/workspace/mysql-server/bugfix/39753/5.1-bugteam/
2765 Luis Soares 2008-12-20
Bug #39753: Replication failure on MIXED + bit + myisam + no PK
When using mixed mode the record values stored inside the storage
engine differed from the ones computed from the row event. This
happened because the prepare_record function was calling
empty_record macro causing some don't care bits to be left set.
Replacing the empty_record with restore_record to restore the
record default values fixes this (as suggested by Mats).
added:
mysql-test/suite/rpl/r/rpl_mixed_bit_pk.result
mysql-test/suite/rpl/t/rpl_mixed_bit_pk.test
modified:
sql/rpl_record.cc
=== added file 'mysql-test/suite/rpl/r/rpl_mixed_bit_pk.result'
--- a/mysql-test/suite/rpl/r/rpl_mixed_bit_pk.result 1970-01-01 00:00:00 +0000
+++ b/mysql-test/suite/rpl/r/rpl_mixed_bit_pk.result 2008-12-20 18:43:30 +0000
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+stop slave;
+drop table if exists t1,t2,t3,t4,t5,t6,t7,t8,t9;
+reset master;
+reset slave;
+drop table if exists t1,t2,t3,t4,t5,t6,t7,t8,t9;
+start slave;
+DROP TABLE IF EXISTS t1;
+CREATE TABLE t1 (`bit_key` bit, `bit` bit, key (`bit_key` )) ENGINE=MyISAM;
+INSERT INTO `t1` ( `bit` ) VALUES ( 0 );
+DELETE FROM `t1` WHERE `bit` < 2 LIMIT 4;
+DROP TABLE t1;
=== added file 'mysql-test/suite/rpl/t/rpl_mixed_bit_pk.test'
--- a/mysql-test/suite/rpl/t/rpl_mixed_bit_pk.test 1970-01-01 00:00:00 +0000
+++ b/mysql-test/suite/rpl/t/rpl_mixed_bit_pk.test 2008-12-20 18:43:30 +0000
@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+#
+# BUG
+# ---
+# BUG#39753: Replication failure on MIXED + bit + myisam + no PK
+#
+# Description
+# -----------
+# Simple statements against a bit column cause failure in mixed-mode
+# replication.
+#
+# Implementation is as follows:
+# i) A table with two bit fields is created. One of them is a key.
+# ii) A record is inserted without specifying the key value.
+# iii) The record is deleted using a where clause that matches it.
+# iv) The slave is synchronized with master
+# v) The table is dropped on master and the slave is re-synchronized
+# with master.
+#
+# Step iv) made the bug evident before the patch, as the slave would
+# fail to find the correspondent row in its database (although it did
+# the insert in step ii) ).
+#
+# Obs
+# ---
+# This test is based on the "how to repeat" section from the bug report.
+#
+#
+
+--source include/master-slave.inc
+
+--disable_warnings
+
+# setup
+
+DROP TABLE IF EXISTS t1;
+CREATE TABLE t1 (`bit_key` bit, `bit` bit, key (`bit_key` )) ENGINE=MyISAM;
+
+# insert and delete
+INSERT INTO `t1` ( `bit` ) VALUES ( 0 );
+DELETE FROM `t1` WHERE `bit` < 2 LIMIT 4;
+
+--enable_warnings
+
+save_master_pos;
+connection slave;
+sync_with_master 0;
+
+# clean up
+connection master;
+DROP TABLE t1;
+save_master_pos;
+connection slave;
+sync_with_master 0;
=== modified file 'sql/rpl_record.cc'
--- a/sql/rpl_record.cc 2008-02-05 13:52:20 +0000
+++ b/sql/rpl_record.cc 2008-12-20 18:43:30 +0000
@@ -297,7 +297,7 @@ unpack_row(Relay_log_info const *rli,
/**
Fills @c table->record[0] with default values.
- First @c empty_record() is called and then, additionally, fields are
+ First @c restore_record() is called and then, additionally, fields are
initialized explicitly with a call to @c set_default().
For optimization reasons, the explicit initialization can be skipped for
@@ -321,7 +321,7 @@ int prepare_record(TABLE *const table,
DBUG_ENTER("prepare_record");
int error= 0;
- empty_record(table);
+ restore_record(table, s->default_values);
if (skip >= table->s->fields) // nothing to do
DBUG_RETURN(0);
