It is out-of topic, but are we really-really sure our phase1 should not be
It looks for me, like what we think of phase1 and phase2 is not what server
thinks of it.
It should not make much difference right now, but maybe in the future.
We do everything in a phase1, which server calls "prepare".
And we do nothing in phase2, where server thinks we would "perform the
/* Tell the storage engine to prepare for the online ALTER. */
if (table->file->alter_table_phase1(thd, altered_table,
Tell the storage engine to perform the online ALTER.
@todo If check_if_supported_alter() returns
HA_ALTER_SUPPORTED_WAIT_LOCK we need to wrap the next call
with a DDL lock.
if (table->file->alter_table_phase2(thd, altered_table,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher.Powers@stripped [mailto:Christopher.Powers@stripped]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 10:54 PM
> To: falcon@stripped
> Subject: Review request: Bug#40265 "Falcon: Concurrent online DROP
> INDEX of the same key"
> See the bug for details: http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=40265
> Falcon Storage Engine Mailing List
> For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/falcon
> To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/falcon?unsub=1