Activity
From 09/05/2024 to 10/04/2024
10/04/2024
- 05:52 AM Bug #9194: FWD selects the wrong index when using CONTAINS?
- Hi all, we have completed the "indeterminate sorting" review and are now starting to make the necessary changes, henc...
- 03:42 AM Bug #9228: FQL to SQL conversion for CONTAINS when the output is expected to be always false is n...
- I've tested ETF and is OK. I think we need to wait for 6667i to be merged, and after that we'll test some other apps...
10/03/2024
- 09:29 AM Feature #9218: Changes in internal tenant management
- > I adjusted the implementation of the tenant ID to match the one from 4GL. As result, at each server restart, the un...
- 09:16 AM Bug #9228 (Internal Test): FQL to SQL conversion for CONTAINS when the output is expected to be a...
- Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> Revision of 9228a, r15478.
>
> I think the code will work fine. I have just a few notes ... - 08:52 AM Bug #9228: FQL to SQL conversion for CONTAINS when the output is expected to be always false is n...
- Revision of 9228a, r15478.
I think the code will work fine. I have just a few notes to add:
* @FqlToSqlConverte... - 07:05 AM Bug #9228: FQL to SQL conversion for CONTAINS when the output is expected to be always false is n...
- Ovidiu, please review.
- 06:01 AM Bug #9228: FQL to SQL conversion for CONTAINS when the output is expected to be always false is n...
- I committed to *9228a revision 15478* a fix for the wrong orderFields generation.
Please review. - 12:01 AM Bug #9228: FQL to SQL conversion for CONTAINS when the output is expected to be always false is n...
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Was your test with 6667i? Because this code does not check correctly for 'order by' AST...
10/02/2024
- 03:18 PM Feature #9218: Changes in internal tenant management
- I have cherry-picked the changes and put them in 9057a. Revision 15463. I hope the branch is not broken (compilable a...
- 02:58 PM Feature #9218: Changes in internal tenant management
- Ovidiu, is this work in a task branch yet? I'd like to look it over to get a better understanding of the changes.
- 02:34 PM Feature #9218: Changes in internal tenant management
- I adjusted the implementation of the tenant ID to match the one from 4GL. As result, at each server restart, the uniq...
- 02:51 PM Feature #9057: enable intermixed access to default tenant (shared) data and tenant-specific data
- Current status:
While the private tables in a tenant enabled database works correctly, the shared tables are still... - 02:31 PM Bug #9228: FQL to SQL conversion for CONTAINS when the output is expected to be always false is n...
- Was your test with 6667i? Because this code does not check correctly for 'order by' ASTs, in the case when the sort ...
- 01:57 PM Bug #9228: FQL to SQL conversion for CONTAINS when the output is expected to be always false is n...
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> What's the FQL being converted here?
The one you discovered while testing with 6667i. - 01:49 PM Bug #9228: FQL to SQL conversion for CONTAINS when the output is expected to be always false is n...
- What's the FQL being converted here?
- 09:40 AM Bug #9228 (Review): FQL to SQL conversion for CONTAINS when the output is expected to be always f...
- I have created task branch *9228a* from *trunk revision 15476*.
I committed the fix in *9228a revision 15477*. Ple... - 09:39 AM Bug #9228 (WIP): FQL to SQL conversion for CONTAINS when the output is expected to be always fals...
- The issue is that for some cases CONTAINS parameter can be an empty string.
* 1. This should be picked up by @FQLPr... - 09:06 AM Bug #9228 (Test): FQL to SQL conversion for CONTAINS when the output is expected to be always fal...
10/01/2024
- 09:55 AM Bug #9224: conversion of sql table name honors FWD reserved words
- A legacy table named @Property@ will have a sql table name of @Property_@ - this is because FWD has a reserved name t...
- 09:52 AM Bug #9224 (New): conversion of sql table name honors FWD reserved words
- 08:47 AM Bug #9222: Validation of a record buffer throws an error in FWD, but does not in 4GL
- This ticket is derived from #9181-10.
- 08:47 AM Bug #9222: Validation of a record buffer throws an error in FWD, but does not in 4GL
- ...
- 08:45 AM Bug #9222 (New): Validation of a record buffer throws an error in FWD, but does not in 4GL
- 08:39 AM Feature #9218: Changes in internal tenant management
- My concern is for any interface (now or introduced later) which takes that tenant id. It is just more secure if the ...
- 08:31 AM Feature #9218: Changes in internal tenant management
- I did additional research and found "this":https://docs.progress.com/bundle/openedge-database-multitenancy-117/page/T...
09/30/2024
- 02:38 PM Feature #9218: Changes in internal tenant management
- > ** @0@ for default tenant,
> ** incrementing positive values for regular tenants
> ** decrementing negative valu... - 02:23 PM Feature #9218: Changes in internal tenant management
- After initial iteration implementation some changes in the management of FWD internal management of tenant feature.
... - 02:22 PM Feature #9218 (New): Changes in internal tenant management
09/25/2024
- 02:58 PM Feature #9057 (WIP): enable intermixed access to default tenant (shared) data and tenant-specific...
- First, a short description of the current state from the implementation standpoint. All low-level data management for...
- 09:53 AM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...
- I am moving this to Normal priority as the regression in #9189 was fixed by reverting the original changes. We can ha...
- 06:28 AM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...
- So this means that converting to client where is the only way to go here? I suppose so.
- 06:26 AM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...
- Alexandru Lungu wrote:
> Hmm I see. This is because it will end up as @null ne 0@ and this is basically true. This y... - 06:17 AM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...
- Hmm I see. This is because it will end up as @null ne 0@ and this is basically true. This you also happen for cases w...
- 06:08 AM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...
- Lorian Sandu wrote:
> I will investigate deeper to see if this case is simplified as @BOOL_FALSE@
Actually, this ... - 05:51 AM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...
- I looked into @FQLPreprocessor.mainWalk()@ and found out how we handle the cases @tablename.extField[?]@ , where the ...
- 04:37 AM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...
- Alexandru Lungu wrote:
> Lorian, please attempt 2) in 9133a. It means replacing invalid @tablename.extField[id]@ wit... - 03:21 AM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...
- > In the customer application, the second preprocessor, even if it is created, it is never actually used. This is why...
09/24/2024
- 07:44 PM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...
- I think I have the question for why before 9095a the incorrect FQL (containing references of form @<tablename>.null@)...
- 01:01 PM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...
- I will do a quick summary here. Let's assume we have a @tablename@ table with a @extField@ and a local integer variab...
- 10:30 AM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...
- I really fear the impact of client where. For the first query you posted: if that query would run over a persistent d...
- 05:25 AM Bug #9133: Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the where...
- >Lorian please, do such experiment and post the Java conversion of buf1.f1[i1] vs buf1.f1[buf1.f2]. Are these process...
- 03:56 AM Bug #9133 (WIP): Array subscript is out of range stops the evaluation of other expressions in the...
- > Ovidiu/Alexandru: Please review.
I don't think changing the grandparent is always correct.
* You can have @for...
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. - 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.
- 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...
- 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.
- 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... - 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... - 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....
- 04:50 AM Bug #9194 (WIP): FWD selects the wrong index when using CONTAINS?
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.
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
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.
- 08:40 AM Bug #9036 (Merge Pending): Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise
- Please merge 9036b to trunk now.
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.
- 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... - 08:17 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise
- Eugenie, please find the changed file attached.
- 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... - 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...
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:...
- 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,...
- 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.
- 01:17 PM Bug #9036 (Merge Pending): Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise
- 01:17 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise
- Please merge 9036a to trunk now.
- 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...
- 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...
- 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...
- 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...
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...
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.
- 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...
- 12:21 PM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise
- All: please proceed with the test plan.
- 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... - 03:08 AM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise
- Server startup fails with this:...
- 02:57 AM Bug #9036: Multi-tenancy: refactor the database in Persistence context-wise
- Ovidiu, 9036a does not compile with Java 8:...
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...
- 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... - 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... - 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...
- 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... - 09:12 AM Bug #9160: trackDatabase() is not called for buffers with openscope 0 resulting in improper clean...
@main.p@...- 09:03 AM Bug #9160 (New): trackDatabase() is not called for buffers with openscope 0 resulting in improper...
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...
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...
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...
- 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...
Also available in: Atom