Activity
From 07/26/2025 to 08/24/2025
08/22/2025
- 02:03 PM Feature #6720: lazy hydration
- I have continued with addressing the functional issues I have found in the large GUI application. These were also mai...
- 06:55 AM Bug #10390: FIND FIRST buffer field change does not propagate into the next FIRST FIRST statements.
- Alexandru Lungu wrote:
> Ah, I see. The DMO is updated and validated. It is inserted in the @RecordNursery@ for futu...
08/21/2025
- 07:34 AM Support #10420: Refactoring DMO interface layers
- The app-by-app conversion process customizes DMO naming by delegating all of the *TRPL processing* to a dedicated Jav...
- 06:17 AM Bug #10390 (Review): FIND FIRST buffer field change does not propagate into the next FIRST FIRST ...
- 06:17 AM Bug #10390 (WIP): FIND FIRST buffer field change does not propagate into the next FIRST FIRST sta...
- Committed revision *16102* on task branch *10390a*:
- Allow FIND UNIQUE to retrieve dmo from dirty database when dmo... - 03:13 AM Bug #10455 (Review): Persistent table CAN-FIND FIRST issue
- Committed revision *16124* on task branch *10455a*:
- Commit changes to @DirtyShareContext@ on open block scope when... - 03:12 AM Bug #10455 (WIP): Persistent table CAN-FIND FIRST issue
- Created task branch *10455a*.
- 02:23 AM Bug #10455: Persistent table CAN-FIND FIRST issue
- I have continued the research for this problem, and I have noticed the following:
* On @DirtyShareContext.getDirtyIn...
08/20/2025
- 10:05 AM Bug #10455: Persistent table CAN-FIND FIRST issue
- I have investigated more about this issue.
The original code that was here, actually worked, it was just the dirty i... - 05:36 AM Bug #10455: Persistent table CAN-FIND FIRST issue
- The following test fails on FWD:...
- 05:32 AM Bug #10455 (Closed): Persistent table CAN-FIND FIRST issue
08/19/2025
- 09:29 AM Feature #10436: Detect Sequential Data Access and Prefetch Records from the Database
- In RandomAccessQuery:
1. Detect sequential increment of a subset of substitution value for the fql.
* Add a smal... - 09:14 AM Support #6709: track nested FIND inside a related FOR loop
- Rebased *6709a* to latest *trunk/16122*, the branch is now at revision *16129*.
- 09:02 AM Bug #9016: Improve performance in FQLPreprocessor by using astCache
- Alexandru, let me know if you have any plans to review 9016a or add it directly to the work from #10362.
- 09:00 AM Bug #9078: emit FindQuery as (reused) variables
- Rebased *9078b* to latest *trunk/16122*, the branch is now at revision *16134*.
- 03:58 AM Bug #10398 (Internal Test): Incorrect base data type used in buffer dereference
- Looks good, thanks.
- 03:52 AM Bug #10398: Incorrect base data type used in buffer dereference
- Committed revision 16112 on task branch 10398a:
- ABS builtin function should not raise error condition when bdt is ... - 03:47 AM Bug #10398: Incorrect base data type used in buffer dereference
- Please check if the @bdt.isUnknown()@, also - I assume no ERROR condition is raised in this case, and it just returns...
- 03:46 AM Bug #10398: Incorrect base data type used in buffer dereference
- Committed revision *16111* on task branch *10398a*:
- @ABS@ builtin function should raise error condition when the d... - 03:12 AM Bug #10398: Incorrect base data type used in buffer dereference
- Please work on this as Eduard is out. I'd like to have this and #10406 in trunk so we can run another conversion.
- 03:07 AM Bug #10398: Incorrect base data type used in buffer dereference
- Then a character field has a valid number representation, this still does throw the same error.
On this and on the p... - 03:01 AM Bug #10398: Incorrect base data type used in buffer dereference
- The incompatible data type error is thrown (223) when the input parameter is not an NumberType, with an Error conditi...
- 02:46 AM Bug #10398: Incorrect base data type used in buffer dereference
- The change looks good. The only unknown is what happens if @h::f1@ is i.e. a character - is there an ERROR condition...
- 02:45 AM Bug #10351 (Test): ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- Branch 10351a was merged to trunk rev 16121 and archived.
- 02:22 AM Bug #10351 (Merge Pending): ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset...
- 10351a can be merged after 10360a
- 01:52 AM Bug #10351: ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- Yes, now is ready to be merged.
- 02:33 AM Bug #10360 (Test): FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- Branch *10360a* was merged to trunk rev *16120* and archived.
- 02:22 AM Bug #10360 (Merge Pending): FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- 10360a can be merged now.
08/18/2025
- 07:58 AM Support #10420: Refactoring DMO interface layers
- This would certainly solve the concern I had in #9976 and much more. It seems to me that the performance of this pro...
- 10:36 PM Support #10420: Refactoring DMO interface layers
- I am going to propose you a radical change in the way we interact with the buffers. This is a new paradigm, maybe clo...
- 06:13 AM Feature #10436: Detect Sequential Data Access and Prefetch Records from the Database
- Prefetching records into cache can significantly improve performance, especially when access patterns are predictable...
- 06:11 AM Feature #10436 (WIP): Detect Sequential Data Access and Prefetch Records from the Database
08/14/2025
- 07:01 AM Feature #6720: lazy hydration
- > Yes, but this was actually the case even before #9701. The return value of the @equalData@ method is used to update...
- 04:11 AM Feature #6720: lazy hydration
- Thanks Alex for the comprehensive overview. I will think about the refactoring of @FIND CURRENT@ and maybe others ins...
- 03:46 AM Feature #6720: lazy hydration
- > I'm not OK with limiting this implementation to only FOR EACH. Large percentages of application queries would be mi...
- 03:31 AM Feature #6720: lazy hydration
- Greg Shah wrote:
> Are you saying that we force hydration of all fields any time @BaseRecord.equalData@ is called? ... - 05:37 AM Bug #9016: Improve performance in FQLPreprocessor by using astCache
- Rebased *9016a* to latest *trunk/16114*, the branch is now at revision *16115*.
- 04:29 AM Feature #9455 (Internal Test): port native user defined functions to SQL Server
- Tests performed with udfs are:
- @testcases/udfs/t-sql@ these are refactored tests in T-SQL language from @testca...
08/13/2025
- 12:36 PM Feature #6720: lazy hydration
- > @16110@ and @16112@: Apart from unimportant rebase issues, I have changed the implementation of @BaseRecord.equalD...
- 12:07 PM Feature #6720: lazy hydration
- > The original implementation of #6720 was to cover as many scenarios as possible, but the @OPEN QUERY@ and @FIND FIR...
- 08:22 AM Feature #6720: lazy hydration
- I have got back to working on this task. I have started with the rebase of the @6720b@ branch. I have rebased to trun...
- 09:31 AM Support #10420: Refactoring DMO interface layers
- Ovidiu suggested to use @default@ to delegate from the @get@ / @set@ to the super-interface cryptic methods (@get1@, ...
- 09:26 AM Support #10420: Refactoring DMO interface layers
- This task is used to discuss how we should avoid non-deterministic naming of DMOs in multithreaded conversion. The in...
- 08:38 AM Support #10420 (New): Refactoring DMO interface layers
08/12/2025
- 12:38 PM Bug #10398 (Review): Incorrect base data type used in buffer dereference
- 12:38 PM Bug #10398 (WIP): Incorrect base data type used in buffer dereference
- Committed on 10398, rev. 16110.
- 11:40 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Alexandru Lungu wrote:
> I added Tomasz as I watcher. Tomasz, can you review 9456b (@SortCriterion.toWhereExpendeNUl... - 08:22 AM Bug #10390: FIND FIRST buffer field change does not propagate into the next FIRST FIRST statements.
- Ah, I see. The DMO is updated and validated. It is inserted in the @RecordNursery@ for future use. It is required at ...
- 08:15 AM Bug #10390: FIND FIRST buffer field change does not propagate into the next FIRST FIRST statements.
- Alexandru Lungu wrote:
> Teodor, there is a particularity of FIND unique in the sense that if there are ambiguous re... - 08:14 AM Bug #10390: FIND FIRST buffer field change does not propagate into the next FIRST FIRST statements.
- Teodor, there is a particularity of FIND unique in the sense that if there are ambiguous results, calling @AMBIGUOUS ...
- 07:30 AM Bug #10390 (Feedback): FIND FIRST buffer field change does not propagate into the next FIRST FIRS...
- What happens for the @FIND@ unique case, which is different from the @FIND@ first case:
- The flow is mostly similar... - 05:51 AM Bug #10390 (WIP): FIND FIRST buffer field change does not propagate into the next FIRST FIRST sta...
- While the initial test case was done, I have also encountered the following test case, which is very similar to the p...
- 03:02 AM Bug #10390 (Review): FIND FIRST buffer field change does not propagate into the next FIRST FIRST ...
- Committed revision *16101* on task branch *10390a*:
- @RandomAccessQuery.executeImpl@ allow dmo to be changed before... - 02:55 AM Bug #10390 (WIP): FIND FIRST buffer field change does not propagate into the next FIRST FIRST sta...
- Created task branch *10390a*.
08/11/2025
- 09:15 AM Bug #10399: Index selection in dirty database
- ...
- 09:02 AM Bug #10399 (New): Index selection in dirty database
- 07:37 AM Bug #10360: FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- > I am starting to do internal testing and I will tell if there is a problem.
I am OK with the plan. - 03:56 AM Bug #10360: FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- The trunk revision which changes the @recordOrThrowError@ to @displayError@ is *11301.1.51* #3761.
This also modifie... - 06:55 AM Bug #10337 (Test): Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- 06:47 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- 10337b was merged as rev 16106.
- 06:25 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Please merge 10337b to trunk after 10004a.
- 06:52 AM Bug #10351: ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- Teodor, is this ready to be merged?
- 06:06 AM Bug #10390: FIND FIRST buffer field change does not propagate into the next FIRST FIRST statements.
- I have analyzed the 4GL behavior more in depth. I have added a @ON WRITE@ to check when the *buffer* gets written to ...
- 05:02 AM Bug #10398: Incorrect base data type used in buffer dereference
- I have the following test case:...
- 04:55 AM Bug #10398 (Test): Incorrect base data type used in buffer dereference
- 04:09 AM Bug #10285 (Test): Static compound query returns no result
- Branch @10285a@ has been merged into trunk as rev. 16103.
- 03:59 AM Bug #10285 (Merge Pending): Static compound query returns no result
- Please merge 10285a to trunk now.
- 02:24 AM Feature #6457 (Review): finish COPY-LOB support
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> > Because if value was @null@, after this operation we would get something very weird ...
08/08/2025
- 11:07 AM Bug #10360 (Internal Test): FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- Nevermind. I think the code in #10360 is a super weird edge case....
- 11:01 AM Bug #10360 (WIP): FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- Teodor Gorghe wrote:
> I have one question which I've didn't found the answer: Why @ErrorManager.displayError@ is us... - 07:01 AM Bug #10337 (Merge Pending): Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- > I also monitored memory allocation over time, it seems ok. There are still an excessive amount of nodes created and...
- 02:13 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Testing status:
Harness and webui navigation - passed
Large customer application FWDTests and unit tests - passed
... - 06:58 AM Bug #10390: FIND FIRST buffer field change does not propagate into the next FIRST FIRST statements.
- The following test case has issues on FWD:
{{Collapse(TestFindQueryUpdate.cls)... - 06:54 AM Bug #10390 (Internal Test): FIND FIRST buffer field change does not propagate into the next FIRST...
08/07/2025
- 08:37 AM Bug #10351 (Internal Test): ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset...
- 08:35 AM Bug #10351: ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- I looked at the changes in 10351a. The way I read the lines at 603/606 is that the root node can be anything (includi...
- 01:24 AM Bug #10351: ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- *Ovidiu*, Constantin ran some tests with a P2J build with changes from this branch.
Can you check the changes from t... - 07:36 AM Bug #10307: FFcache keys don't match for the values inlined vs passed as args
- I did put a little thought into how we can inline the arguments into the fql in order to match the FFcache keys for t...
- 06:54 AM Bug #10360 (Review): FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- 06:54 AM Bug #10360 (WIP): FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- Committed revision *16085* on task branch *10360a*:
- Reverted *16084*. Replaced @displayError@ with @recordOrThrowE... - 06:54 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Forgot about that, I'll uncommit.
- 06:51 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- > I just realized that we don't actually need the values in the lruCache, it acts more like a queue, so only the node...
- 06:37 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- I may have misunderstood things a bit :) Apparently, there are multiple instances of @ReverseLookup@, which means mul...
- 04:32 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Artur Școlnic wrote:
> I think the issue is that bulk invalidation where entire caches are cleared or removed do not...
08/06/2025
- 11:05 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- I think the issue is that bulk invalidation where entire caches are cleared or removed do not clean up the associated...
- 09:34 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Alexandru Lungu wrote:
> You can decrease the cache size to something like 10 for more straight-forward testing. Or ... - 09:26 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- The same thing happens in trunk, the number of leaked Node instances grows slowly, but surely. After 20 mins of harne...
- 09:01 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- > I think we are still leaking memory, after one hour or running Harness on loop, there are 500k 'live' Node objects,...
- 08:58 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- I think we are still leaking memory, after one hour or running Harness on loop, there are 500k 'live' Node objects, a...
- 07:24 AM Bug #10337 (Internal Test): Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Review of 10337b:
* @hash = hashCode();@ and @public int hashCode() { return hash; }@ is not correct.
* there is ... - 07:15 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- This actually is implemented for the explicit invalidation, but it needed to be added for the expiry event also.
I c... - 06:19 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- > You are right, this also caused the issue from note 43. After fixing this problem, the Nodes are kept at a reasonab...
- 06:06 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Alexandru Lungu wrote:
> * *Important:* I think @value.head@ is inconsistent after removal. If you remove a node, th... - 05:19 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Alexandru, I think we have an issue with the Key objects retention.
I did a memory profiling and Keys are accumulati... - 05:15 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- * Please make @Node@ class static again.
* short-circuit @equals@ so that @this == o@ returns true directly.
* *Imp... - 10:32 AM Bug #10385 (Review): Incorrect reset of the cursor cache in Reposition
- 10:31 AM Bug #10385 (WIP): Incorrect reset of the cursor cache in Reposition
- Committed on 10385a, rev. 16090.
- 10:20 AM Bug #10385: Incorrect reset of the cursor cache in Reposition
- I have the following test case:...
- 09:59 AM Bug #10385 (Test): Incorrect reset of the cursor cache in Reposition
- 06:45 AM Bug #10285: Static compound query returns no result
- These should have covered the affected code.
I think the branch can be merged into trunk. - 06:20 AM Bug #10285: Static compound query returns no result
- Ovidiu, my testing plan is done. If you have anything else in mind, please let me know, otherwise, this can be added ...
- 06:17 AM Bug #10285: Static compound query returns no result
- Large gui app unittests passed ✅
- 04:16 AM Bug #10285: Static compound query returns no result
- Harness + reports passed ✅
- 03:07 AM Bug #10285: Static compound query returns no result
- Thnaks Ovidiu, for the review.
This is the testing plan I am currently running:
* unit tests + fwd tests of a large... - 05:21 AM Bug #6923 (Pending): inner transaction block reverts too much
- I integrated 6923a into 8388a as these changes alone are dependent upon record nursery proper rollbacking (which was ...
- 01:42 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
>
> Please review. I think we need to redo the runtime regression tests again, just to be o...
08/05/2025
- 03:18 PM Bug #6767: Possible name clashes in DMO classes
- Can this task be merged?
- 10:02 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Changes applied. Pushed up to revision 16106 after rebase to latest trunk.
Please review. I think we need to redo ... - 08:44 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- I am about to alter 9456b and address the following 5 occurrences of current @isLimitBeforeOffset()@:
* @FQLHelper.c... - 08:29 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Alexandru, is this something which prevents 9456b to be merged to trunk? Does it affect ... - 08:11 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Alexandru, is this something which prevents 9456b to be merged to trunk? Does it affect other dialects than SQLServer?
- 08:02 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- I reviewed the changes and @toWhereExpendedNullExpression@ seems safe for all dialects. The things that drove the COA...
- 06:58 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Ah nevermind, is the one added at the beginning for @withNull@.
- 06:57 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Eduard, in @toWhereExpendedNullExpression@, isn't the last parenthesis unbalanced? You have @whereClause.append(" or ...
- 09:45 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Alexandru Lungu wrote:
> * If a node expires and it was the last node of the list, then the reverseCache should ev... - 08:24 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Review of 10337b:
* add braces to the lambda inside @ReverseLookup@ c'tor
* Indent @lruCache@ javadoc (/** shouldn'... - 07:18 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- I addressed the review in rev 16075.
- 05:02 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Review of 10337b/16074:
* rewrite @reverseLookup.lruCache.get(new ReverseLookup.Node(l3Cache, k.k2));@ to @reverse... - 07:49 AM Bug #10351: ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- FWD (error message hidden by READ XML invoke, but is the same error as from 4GL):...
- 07:29 AM Bug #10351: ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> OK, so if you have something like @foo/bar/@ in the XMl structure, and neither foo or ba... - 07:10 AM Bug #10351: ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- OK, so if you have something like @foo/bar/@ in the XMl structure, and neither foo or bar match the temp-table, then ...
- 01:06 AM Bug #10351: ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> OK, what you found is if the root node does not match the dataset, and is a temp-table (... - 07:13 AM Bug #10360: FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- Success is true in this case because the @silentWorker@ catches the @ErrorConditionException@, thrown by deference op...
- 07:07 AM Bug #10360: FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- Hm... why is @success@ true in this case?
- 04:22 AM Bug #10360 (Feedback): FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- Ok. I have understood.
The @ErrorConditionException@ thrown by @deference@ operator is eaten by @silentWorker@, beca... - 06:33 AM Bug #10374: Issues revealed while running testcases
- These are some issues which I encountered while testing MSSQL dialect but found to affect others, as well. I did not ...
- 06:08 AM Bug #10374 (New): Issues revealed while running testcases
- 05:52 AM Feature #6457: finish COPY-LOB support
- Eduard Soltan wrote:
> > * @longchar.java@
> > ** why @"" + StringHelper.@ ?
>
> Because if value was @null@, a...
08/04/2025
- 02:35 PM Bug #10351: ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- OK, what you found is if the root node does not match the dataset, and is a temp-table (serialized) name, then the ro...
- 05:56 AM Bug #10351: ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Teodor, is this related to #10203 ?
The testcase that Dennis wrote on #10203 is relat... - 05:49 AM Bug #10351: ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- Teodor, is this related to #10203 ?
- 01:54 PM Bug #10360 (WIP): FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- Teodor, the fix is not OK. The root cause is the @block-level on error undo, throw.@ clause in FWD and an additional...
- 05:46 AM Bug #10360: FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- On FWD, without the 10360a rev 16084 fix, the test cases always fails when the handle is invalid, including @FOR EACH...
- 04:41 AM Bug #10360: FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- IMHO, there are multiple issues here:
* if no records actually "hit" the faulty clause, no error is thrown.
** if t... - 01:48 AM Bug #10360 (Review): FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- 01:47 AM Bug #10360 (WIP): FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- 01:47 AM Bug #10360: FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> For now, lets fix it so that FWD doesn't abend - I assume the resolver/lambda? for this ... - 10:43 AM Feature #6457: finish COPY-LOB support
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Review for 6457a rev 16070:
> * @Stream.java@ - why the reason for the commented co... - 06:35 AM Feature #6457 (WIP): finish COPY-LOB support
- Review for 6457a rev 16070:
* missing history entry or copyright year update: @block_properties.rules@, @copy_lob.ru... - 10:41 AM Bug #10285 (Internal Test): Static compound query returns no result
- Yes, I think you are right. Your reasoning seems sound to me.
Let's get this into tests with the other testsets. Ple... - 09:37 AM Bug #10285 (Review): Static compound query returns no result
- *I have committed @10285a/16085@.* My changes make that FORWARD-ONLY result sets are created only if this entire cond...
- 07:08 AM Bug #10285 (WIP): Static compound query returns no result
- I think I understand the root cause of the issue.
In FWD, we already have a wrapper for the forward only result se... - 08:16 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Alexandru Lungu wrote:
> I am OK then with the changes to RAQ to distinguish between dirty and primary parameters.... - 07:50 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- > Not only for that, there are cases when user defined where clause might be different in SqlServer dialect and H2 bu...
- 05:55 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Alexandru Lungu wrote:
> Review of 9456b:
> * I see plenty of @isLimitBeforeOffset@ checks that alter the behavior ... - 05:37 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Alexandru Lungu wrote:
> Is @toWhereExpendeNullExpression@ a AND / OR based null check vs @toWhereExpression@ that... - 05:14 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Review of 9456b:
* I see plenty of @isLimitBeforeOffset@ checks that alter the behavior of persistence code. Sometim... - 04:52 AM Bug #10337 (Review): Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- I implemented the idea from #10337-19 (with a few changes) in 10337b/16074.
Alexandru, please review.
08/01/2025
- 02:30 PM Bug #10360: FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Ovidiu: do you recall some example where we emit a client-side WHERE in FWD, in conversi... - 08:03 AM Bug #10360: FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- For now, lets fix it so that FWD doesn't abend - I assume the resolver/lambda? for this argument is not properly exec...
- 07:54 AM Bug #10360: FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- I have updated the Test code from the #10360-2.
{{Collapse(Logs)... - 07:39 AM Bug #10360: FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- Teodor, please also add a test where @hdl::f3@ is a valid field and @hdl@ is a valid handle.
- 07:26 AM Bug #10360: FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- This one is weird, not in terms that it fails, but how 4GL behaves. In FWD, we evaluate all arguments before executi...
- 07:02 AM Bug #10360: FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- We have the following test case: {{Collapse(CODE)...
- 06:53 AM Bug #10360 (Test): FOR loop WHERE condition evaluation issue
- 01:03 PM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- OK, I will remove the outer @if@.
- 01:00 PM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> * the @releaseSavepoint@ part - for non-local dbs, that should also check via JDBC for t... - 12:43 PM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Ovidiu, some notes:
* the @"FirstNumber".equals(firstColumnLabel)@ approach (appears twice now in the code) I think ... - 12:33 PM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- I did the best effort to detect the dialect in @Session@ in order to avoid the NPE regression reported in #7143-1634 ...
- 09:25 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Alexandru, please review the @p2j.persist@ changes.
- 07:13 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Ovidiu, 9456b/16097 looks good (I've committed some formatting fixes).
Please commit the dialect NPE fix from #714... - 07:37 AM Bug #6923: inner transaction block reverts too much
- Alexandru Lungu wrote:
> > Thanks, then I have no other concerns for 6923a_h2 . The changes are additive and can be ... - 07:19 AM Bug #6923: inner transaction block reverts too much
- > Thanks, then I have no other concerns for 6923a_h2 . The changes are additive and can be merged to fwd-h2 trunk (an...
- 06:59 AM Bug #6923: inner transaction block reverts too much
- Thanks, then I have no other concerns for 6923a_h2 . The changes are additive and can be merged to fwd-h2 trunk (and...
- 06:57 AM Bug #6923: inner transaction block reverts too much
- > What happens at this step in FWD, when the sub-tx is rollbacked? I assume the record is removed completely from the...
- 06:52 AM Bug #6923: inner transaction block reverts too much
- Constantin Asofiei wrote:
> Also, you are missing assigning the multiplex ID to the row, @reclaimPrimaryKey@.
But w... - 06:36 AM Bug #6923: inner transaction block reverts too much
- Also, in other words, after the sub-tx was rolled back: the newly created record still survives, and needs its PK to ...
- 06:34 AM Bug #6923: inner transaction block reverts too much
- Alexandru Lungu wrote:
> * record is created (claiming a new key)
OK, so this adds the record to the multiplex inde... - 06:22 AM Bug #6923: inner transaction block reverts too much
- > I think if a row is added to the scan index, then all indexes need to see this row.
My code is mostly like @getN... - 06:20 AM Bug #6923: inner transaction block reverts too much
- > Alexandru, how is reclaimPrimaryKey supposed to be used?
I can agree that my implementation was quite aggresive.... - 06:10 AM Bug #6923: inner transaction block reverts too much
- Alexandru, how is @reclaimPrimaryKey@ supposed to be used?
With 6923a_h2/60, we leave the table indexes in an inco... - 05:43 AM Bug #6923: inner transaction block reverts too much
- Constantin, just a reminder. Please review 6923a_h2/60. I want to merge it to FWD_H2 trunk and eventually make a rele...
- 06:06 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- ...
- 06:00 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Although, invalidation of the L3 caches on revereseLookup/LRUList expiry would be a nightmare. We would need to keep ...
- 05:54 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- How about...
- 05:52 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- > Map<RecordIdentifier<String>, LRUList<L2Key>> reverseLookup = new WeakHashMap<>();
Considering the L3 cache for ... - 05:50 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Well, I guess a map with weak references as keys is a WeakHashMap :)
- 05:49 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Alexandru Lungu wrote:
> But I want to express my concern of the fact that we are *still* allowing the reverse-look-... - 05:35 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- > I think that if we make the reverseLookup a LRU cache with weak referenced keys, we can unbound the L3 cache.
Te... - 03:52 AM Feature #6457 (Review): finish COPY-LOB support
- I'll review the first pass and we'll work on the codepage problems in a second branch.
- 01:28 AM Bug #10351: ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- Committed revision *16081* on task branch *10351a*:
- Added some @isRoot = false@ before break because the next stre...
07/31/2025
- 12:35 PM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Artur Școlnic wrote:
> Alternatively, we can disregard the ReveresLookup class in favor of a more light weight solut... - 12:02 PM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Alternatively, we can disregard the ReveresLookup class in favor of a more light weight solution:...
- 10:47 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Alexandru, what if we introduce a new type of LRU that has weak references as keys? This will take care of the situat...
- 06:25 AM Bug #10337 (WIP): Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Artur, please reassess #10337-14 issue and #10337-19 idea. ReverseLookup collections are a 2D caches. Introducing a L...
- 10:10 AM Feature #10325 (Review): Optimize AdaptiveQuery for single-result scenarios
- I have committed @10325a/16076@. This revision contains mostly cosmetic changes.
I have run the performance test sui... - 09:17 AM Bug #10351 (Review): ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- Committed revision *16080* on task branch *10351a*:
- @DATASET:READ-XML@ added support for buffer as root node.
T... - 04:44 AM Bug #10351 (WIP): ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- Created task branch *10351a*.
- 04:22 AM Bug #10351: ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
- On OE 4GL, you can define XML input files, for static and dynamic datasets, with a structure like this:...
- 04:16 AM Bug #10351 (Test): ProDataSet READ-XML issue when temp-table node is the same as dataset node
07/30/2025
- 03:10 PM Bug #10337 (Review): Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Alexandru Lungu wrote:
>
> However, in the heap dump I analyzed, @emptyRecordsCache@ was (surprisingly) mostly emp... - 07:07 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- > I think that the memory leak in 9802f was caused mainly by the absence of a designated ExpiryListener for the empty...
- 06:46 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- I think that the memory leak in 9802f was caused mainly by the absence of a designated @ExpiryListener@ for the @empt...
- 03:44 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- In fact, I think there is a small caveat. We still need a @touch@ mechanism so that the LRU cache will mark the @Node...
- 03:31 AM Bug #10337 (WIP): Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- 03:31 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Review of 10337b:...
07/29/2025
- 01:17 PM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Committed on 9456b, rev. 16081.
Reverted boolean conversion for dirty database, separated parameters for FQL query... - 10:18 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> But that is not always the case. There are cases when an UDF (in H2 that is a method from... - 09:40 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Yes, that is only a particular case of transformation. Also, many of the transformations, although more complicated (...
- 09:29 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Ovidiu Maxiniuc wrote:
> This is most likely incorrect: if the primary is MSSQL, this will cause the booleans to b... - 09:19 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Eduard Soltan wrote:
> Committed on 9456b, rev. 16076.
> Convert booleans for dirty database in case primary databa... - 06:53 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Committed on 9456b, rev. 16077. AddInterval and GetInterval function fix-ups
- 04:10 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- Committed on 9456b, rev. 16076.
Convert booleans for dirty database in case primary database does not support bool... - 03:25 AM Feature #9456: implement SQL Server dialect and helpers
- *Eduard* - there are usages of 'lower' in @udf/sqlserver/udfs.sql@ where it matches with an uppercase text, see:
<pr... - 10:50 AM Feature #10325 (WIP): Optimize AdaptiveQuery for single-result scenarios
- I have continued implementation for this task.
For the issue spotted in the last part of #10325-4, I have stopped f... - 09:32 AM Bug #10026: A multi-table AdaptiveQuery running off-end is still updating the cursor
- I made some more experiments related with Scrolling/Non-Scrolling Queries.
For this testcase: {{Collapse(Scrolling &... - 06:02 AM Bug #10337: Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- Artur, please archive branches after you merge them - 10337a is still 'active'.
07/28/2025
- 11:31 AM Feature #10094: RECIDs from different tenants of same logical database should not overlap
- The erroneous output of the _seqno to log files fixed against this RedMine and reported against https://proj.goldenco...
- 11:30 AM Feature #6457: finish COPY-LOB support
- I am not really sure how the conversion happens in UTF-8 character to ISO-8859-1 in 4GL.
h3. Test 1
-Cpinternal... - 02:46 AM Feature #6457: finish COPY-LOB support
- Committed on 6457a, rev. 16069.
- Added NO-CONVERT conversion support + plus error handling. From the docs:... - 04:32 AM Bug #10171 (Internal Test): Word Index/CONTAINS support for MS SQL Server.
- I tested 9456a with a few standalone testcases I made with CONTAINS and they were ok. 9456a was already merged to tru...
07/26/2025
- 08:15 AM Bug #10337 (Review): Possible memory leak with FastFindCache
- I overhauled the ReverseLookup and brought back the changes from 9802f, tested the code and it is as fast as 9802f, I...
Also available in: Atom