FWD » Core Development » Database

09/23/2024

10:38 AM Bug #9133 (Review): Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in ...

Committed to @9133a / rev 15454@
Ovidiu/Alexandru: Please review. Lorian Sandu

07:50 AM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...

Lorian, please put this change in a branch and move this into Review. Alexandru Lungu

06:50 AM Bug #9133 (WIP): Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the...

I looked into how @AbstractQuery.preprocessSubstituionArguments@ behaves in terms of error handling. I found out that... Lorian Sandu

09:19 AM Bug #9194: FWD selects the wrong index when using CONTAINS?

Good findings. Please edit the wiki page to include your important clarifications. Greg Shah

07:26 AM Bug #9194: FWD selects the wrong index when using CONTAINS?

Greg Shah wrote (note #8357-130):
> [[p2j:Chapter_27_Sorting_Query_Results#Single-Index-Selection-Rules|Index Select... Radu Apetrii

05:40 AM Bug #9194: FWD selects the wrong index when using CONTAINS?

Here's a summary of what happened so far:
*Example 1*
{{collapse
Working with a table @test@ that has two indexe... Radu Apetrii

05:15 AM Bug #9194: FWD selects the wrong index when using CONTAINS?

In #8357, it was brought to our attention that FWD selects the wrong index in a query that has the @CONTAINS@ clause.... Radu Apetrii

04:50 AM Bug #9194 (WIP): FWD selects the wrong index when using CONTAINS?

Radu Apetrii

09/20/2024

07:28 AM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...

For awareness, I am raising the priority of this task in relation to #9189. Ovidiu Maxiniuc

09/18/2024

02:17 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Ovidiu
There is a regression when accessing remote databases.
Please see #6667-1160 Tomasz Domin

09/16/2024

08:55 AM Bug #9036 (Test): Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Branch 9036b was committed to trunk as r15442 then it was archived. Ovidiu Maxiniuc

08:40 AM Bug #9036 (Merge Pending): Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Please merge 9036b to trunk now. Eric Faulhaber

09/14/2024

09:09 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

The fix works fine, no more errors and appservers are working too. Eugenie Lyzenko

08:29 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> Eugenie, please find the changed file attached.
Thanks, I'll test now and be back with r... Eugenie Lyzenko

08:17 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Eugenie, please find the changed file attached. Ovidiu Maxiniuc

08:12 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> Eugenie Lyzenko wrote:
> > I also have the issue with trunk @15440@:
> > And some appserv... Eugenie Lyzenko

08:04 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Eugenie Lyzenko wrote:
> I also have the issue with trunk @15440@:
> And some appservers are now failing to be star... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

09/13/2024

07:43 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

I also have the issue with trunk @15440@ and a large GUI app:... Eugenie Lyzenko

03:27 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

After Constantin picked 9036a changes from the latest trunk, he identified a problem with one of the @Tenant@ fields,... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

01:55 PM Bug #9036 (Test): Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Branch 9036a was committed to trunk as r15440 then it was archived. Ovidiu Maxiniuc

01:17 PM Bug #9036 (Merge Pending): Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Eric Faulhaber

01:17 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Please merge 9036a to trunk now. Eric Faulhaber

12:54 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

The smoke test went fine. I guess we are ready to merge. While the database was imported, I already rebased the branc... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

11:46 AM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

I will. But first, I need to import the full database because the unit-test is performed with a reduced instance. I w... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

11:28 AM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Ovidiu, please smoke test the GUI app for which you ran unit testing. If you can log in, open a few screens, and ther... Eric Faulhaber

09:40 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Eric,
Actually, there was no lock issue. FWD behaved like 4GL. The problem was the test conditions in AWS. I execute... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

09/12/2024

12:53 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Ovidiu, please notify us when the lock release defect we discussed earlier is resolved. We will need to re-run the re... Eric Faulhaber

09/11/2024

02:21 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

ETF testing passed, the other REST app also passed. Constantin Asofiei

02:14 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

My unittests of one of the larger customers finished with success. I used the prebuilt binaries. In fact, 9036a/r1544... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

12:21 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

All: please proceed with the test plan. Eric Faulhaber

11:47 AM Bug #9036 (Internal Test): Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> Code review 9036a/15442-15444:
> @builtin_functions.rules@ needs a history entry.
I had th... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

03:08 AM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Server startup fails with this:... Constantin Asofiei

02:57 AM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Ovidiu, 9036a does not compile with Java 8:... Constantin Asofiei

09/10/2024

06:58 PM Bug #9036 (Review): Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Ovidiu, please post here again when the review is addressed and set this to "Internal Test" status. My points are pre... Eric Faulhaber

06:48 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Code review 9036a/15442-15444:
Nice work, Ovidiu. My findings...
@builtin_functions.rules@ needs a history entr... Eric Faulhaber

05:33 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Eric,
I committed my changes and rebased the branch to latest trunk. Current revision is 15444.
The conversion cha... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

03:25 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

As discussed in recent standups, the current plan is to defer the metadata work and finish the core refactoring for t... Eric Faulhaber

08:10 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

First, the good news.
It seems that a tenant change cannot be performed while in a database transaction. In case thi... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

09:12 AM Bug #9160: trackDatabase() is not called for buffers with openscope 0 resulting in improper clean...

@main.p@... Lorian Sandu

09:03 AM Bug #9160 (New): trackDatabase() is not called for buffers with openscope 0 resulting in improper...

Lorian Sandu

09/09/2024

05:30 PM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...

This is actually happening in the case of one of our customer, so it needs to be fixed. See #7143-1204.
The (anony... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

09/06/2024

07:13 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Short update on task status:
* I managed to get a stable revision of 9036a after the rebase. Committed revision 1543... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

09/05/2024

07:20 AM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

> When writing 4GL code and the tenant is changed, this MUST happen outside any transaction. All buffers must be flus... Greg Shah

08:03 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

I fixed locking in tenant mode. The fields of @Tenant@ container which must be final are wrapped in a new class which... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

05:06 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Artur Școlnic wrote:
> The second issue is that the SysError @tt already exists@ is not caught in a catch block, the... Artur Școlnic

09/04/2024

04:50 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Go ahead and move fields from @Context@ to @Tenant@ as needed. Keep in mind that all fields in @Tenant@ must be immut... Eric Faulhaber

02:46 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

As part of my tests of the 9036a/15426 I used two concurrent users which execute basic CRUD operations on the databas... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

01:50 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

The changes in 9036a/15426 look good to me. What is left to implement for this task to be complete (not considering #... Eric Faulhaber

03:33 AM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...

... Lorian Sandu

03:32 AM Bug #9133 (Internal Test): Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressi...

Lorian Sandu

09/03/2024

07:44 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

No, you are right. That was just my brain being lazy.
I addressed the issue. Also, I fixed a problem with re-initial... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

05:53 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> Actually, I used the database name, in lowercase. That was also to make sure there are no c... Eric Faulhaber

10:15 AM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> Greg Shah wrote:
> > [...] The table-level annotation can help us with our implementation o... Greg Shah

09:58 AM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Actually, I used the database name, in lowercase. That was also to make sure there are no conflicts with the default ... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

07:54 AM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> > The default tenant's @Tenant@ object would be created when the @Persistence@ object is in... Eric Faulhaber

08:54 AM Bug #9127: Decimal values with precision over 50 can't be inserted in the persistent databases.

Values like @4000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000@, with more than 40 digits, can be stored in OE persisten... Artur Școlnic

08:48 AM Bug #9127 (New): Decimal values with precision over 50 can't be inserted in the persistent databa...

Artur Școlnic

07:22 AM Feature #5219: implement native full-text search for word index and CONTAINS support

> The exploration and possible use of database native support to implement CONTAINS support is considered part of thi... Greg Shah

09/02/2024

05:16 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> > But why do you mean by breaking the encapsulation? Pinning the @... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

03:56 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Greg Shah wrote:
> [...] The table-level annotation can help us with our implementation of shared vs multi-tenant ta... Eric Faulhaber

07:41 AM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

> 2. Switching to multi-tenant database mode requires reconversion
Please note that an important objective of our ... Greg Shah

08/30/2024

06:06 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> But why do you mean by breaking the encapsulation? Pinning the @Persistence@ object to a sp... Eric Faulhaber

02:40 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> I've also been thinking more about the "need to reconvert for multi-tenancy mode" aspect we ... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

02:27 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Eric Faulhaber wrote:
> We discussed this, but I don't think it is a settled point yet. If we revert the changes you... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

01:44 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

I've also been thinking more about the "need to reconvert for multi-tenancy mode" aspect we discussed. We noted that ... Eric Faulhaber

01:27 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
>
> *1. A @Persistence@ object for a logical database is not enough*
>
> My commits in 9... Eric Faulhaber

11:58 AM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

The investigations for _meta database lead me to other issues. We discussed today and here is a summary of our meet.
... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

09:06 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

To summarize, there are 2 issues. The first one is that @no-error@ is not honored in FWD when a handle is deleted and... Artur Școlnic

08/29/2024

09:40 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Replacing @ErrorManager.recordOrThrowError@ with @ErrorManager.recordOrShowDatabaseError@ did not solve the issue. Artur Școlnic

08:28 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

For errors conditions being raised when database is accessed, we found quirks which we solved via calling @ErrorManag... Constantin Asofiei

08:02 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

... Artur Școlnic

07:59 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

... Artur Școlnic

06:18 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

start.p... Artur Școlnic

05:02 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Artur Școlnic wrote:
> Coming back to #9091-37, it looks like proc2 should not be executed at all, but it is execute... Artur Școlnic

04:50 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Coming back to #9091-37, it looks like proc2 should not be executed at all, but it is executed in FWD, which causes t... Artur Școlnic

03:32 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

In @ProcedureManager.delete()@... Artur Școlnic

02:54 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

start.p... Artur Școlnic

07:11 AM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

> But the information is pretty much similar (like @_File@ and related tables).
These databases share the same ex... Greg Shah

08/28/2024

06:42 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise

Earlier today I committed my latest changes to 9036a and rebased the branch to latest trunk. The current revision is ... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

08:28 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> ... and used @run checkNew.@ in @proc1@ and in the @finally@ block of @start.p@. In bot... Constantin Asofiei

07:51 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

As far as I know, errors like @tt already exists@ are not supposed to be caught with @catch e as Progress.Lang.Error@... Artur Școlnic

07:38 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

In FWD, tt is flushed 3 times, at the create, on the associate of the dataset (throws the error) and when exiting the... Artur Școlnic

07:23 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Adding @release tt@ in proc1 after the creates causes the error not to be caught in 4gl, this matches the behavior in... Artur Școlnic

06:53 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

I've added this in @parser.p@:... Constantin Asofiei

06:50 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Could running of a procedure with an output parameter cause a flush and expose the errors in the procedures ran previ... Artur Școlnic

06:49 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Another test: use a secondary buffer @def buffer buftt1 for tt1.@ in @proc1@ instead of ... Artur Școlnic

06:45 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> OK, now test in OpenEdge with a @TABLE@ parameter instead of @DATASET@, add a @proc3@ wi... Artur Școlnic

06:43 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Another test: use a secondary buffer @def buffer buftt1 for tt1.@ in @proc1@ instead of the implicit buffer, and test... Constantin Asofiei

06:42 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

OK, now test in OpenEdge with a @TABLE@ parameter instead of @DATASET@, add a @proc3@ with a @def output parameter ta... Constantin Asofiei

06:42 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

proc2 does not seem to be executed, however, if the output parameter is not used, the error is no longer thrown at al... Artur Școlnic

06:34 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

... Artur Școlnic

06:18 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Add a @MESSAGE@ statement in proc2, so we know if that proc2 body is executed or not. Also, test this with and witho... Constantin Asofiei

06:00 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

start.p... Artur Școlnic

05:52 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> No, the output of @ex:getMessage(1)@.
@tt already exists...@
Artur Școlnic

05:45 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Artur Școlnic wrote:
> Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> > Who exactly throws this error - @reader:sax-parse()@ or @run p... Constantin Asofiei

05:44 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Artur Școlnic wrote:
> Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> > What is the error message being caught in OpenEdge?
> Caught... Constantin Asofiei

05:43 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Who exactly throws this error - @reader:sax-parse()@ or @run proc2@?
@run proc2@
Artur Școlnic

05:42 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> What is the error message being caught in OpenEdge?
Caught exception! Artur Școlnic

05:42 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

What is the error message being caught in OpenEdge? Who exactly throws this error - @reader:sax-parse()@ or @run proc... Constantin Asofiei

05:31 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

The parser is a program designed to parse an XML file and insert the data in the temp tables defined in it. The error... Artur Școlnic

05:17 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

start.p... Artur Școlnic

05:15 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

It seems like the external procedure is deleted at the end of the main program and all of it's resources are closed, ... Artur Școlnic

08/26/2024

08:49 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

I've added MESSAGE statements like this:
* main.p... Constantin Asofiei

04:39 AM Bug #9091: Unique composite index is ignored when create is used in an external procedure

In @ProcedureManager@, for @External.execute()@, there are 3 finalizables objects added to the @finalizables@ set, on... Artur Școlnic

08:08 AM Feature #7960 (Test): Allow query logs to be collected in a H2 database

Ioana-Cristina Prioteasa

08:08 AM Feature #7960: Allow query logs to be collected in a H2 database

Branch 7960a merged to *trunk as rev. 15394* and archived. Ioana-Cristina Prioteasa

06:36 AM Feature #7960 (Merge Pending): Allow query logs to be collected in a H2 database

I am OK with the changes. Please go ahead and merge 7960a to trunk. Alexandru Lungu