Hi Nirbhay! On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Nirbhay Choubey <nirb...@mariadb.com> wrote:
> Hi Sachin, > > On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Sachin Setiya <sachin.set...@mariadb.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Nirbhay! >> >> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 7:09 AM, Nirbhay Choubey <nirb...@mariadb.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Sachin, >>> >>> The overall patch looks ok. I, however, have a few minor comments inline. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 1:21 AM, SachinSetiya <sachin.set...@mariadb.com >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> revision-id: 98b2a9c967a5eaa1f99bb3ef229ff2af62018ffe >>>> (mariadb-10.0.28-34-g98b2a9c) >>>> parent(s): 9bf92706d19761722b46d66a671734466cb6e98e >>>> author: Sachin Setiya >>>> committer: Sachin Setiya >>>> timestamp: 2017-01-19 11:50:59 +0530 >>>> message: >>>> >>>> MDEV-4774 Strangeness with max_binlog_stmt_cache_size Settings >>>> >>>> Problem:- When setting max_binlog_stmt_cache_size=18446744073709547520 >>>> from either command line or .cnf file, server fails to start. >>>> >>>> Solution:- Added one more function eval_num_suffix_ull , which uses >>>> strtoull to get unsigned ulonglong from string. And getopt_ull calles >>>> this >>>> >>> > .. cut .. > >> diff --git a/mysql-test/suite/binlog/t/binlog_max_binlog_stmt_cache_size.test >>>> b/mysql-test/suite/binlog/t/binlog_max_binlog_stmt_cache_size.test >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 0000000..bc30b48 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/mysql-test/suite/binlog/t/binlog_max_binlog_stmt_cache_size.test >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ >>>> +source include/have_log_bin.inc; >>>> +select @@max_binlog_stmt_cache_size; >>>> + >>>> +--let $cache_size=`select @@max_binlog_stmt_cache_size;` >>>> + >>>> +set global max_binlog_stmt_cache_size= 18446744073709547520; >>>> +select @@max_binlog_stmt_cache_size; >>>> + >>>> +set global max_binlog_stmt_cache_size= 18446744073709547519; >>>> +select @@max_binlog_stmt_cache_size; >>>> >>> >>> I would also add tests for ULLONG_MAX and ULLONG_MAX +/- 1. >>> >>> Added the test for ULLONG_MAX+1, I am already testing for ULLONG_MAX and >> ULLONG_MAX-1. >> > > Not exactly. What you currently test is the maximum allowed value > '18446744073709547520' > for this variable (which is good). But, I would adittionally like to have > it ULL_MAX (& +/1) which > is 18446744073709551615. > Sorry Got it. Changed. > > Considering this change, I have no more remarks. > > Best, > Nirbhay > > -- Regards sachin
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers Post to : maria-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
