On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 4:21 AM, Sergey Petrunia wrote:
> Hi Varun,
>
> On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 08:20:51PM +0530, Varun wrote:
> > revision-id: 787610a1f5cec04311fd16f6c1de87171e5cfdd4
> (mariadb-10.2.3-159-g787610a)
> > parent(s): bc12d993d7bc94a9533028a258afc7e4ceb21e92
Hi,
Here is the issue https://jira.mariadb.org/browse/MDEV-11645 on which I
need suggestions
The observations made are:
- in 10.1, varchar endspace was bzero-ed
archive depended on it to not pack garbage
- in 10.2, varchar endspace is not bzero-ed
which breaks the archive SE.
Was this change
eb 5, 2017 at 8:10 PM, Sergei Golubchik wrote:
> Hi, Varun!
>
> On Feb 05, Varun Gupta wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Here is the issue https://jira.mariadb.org/browse/MDEV-11645 on which I
> > need suggestions
> >
> > The observations made are:
> >
> > -
t; {
> "query_block": {
> "select_id": 1,
> "cost_info": {
> "query_cost": "1.41"
> },
> "table": {
> "table_name": "t1",
> "access_type": "ran
Hi Ian,
The task was mainly to set a value greater than 0. So on the optimizer call
it was decided that we can raise it to 200 too. I will do it in a new patch.
On Sat 2 Feb, 2019, 12:36 AM Ian Gilfillan I see the eq_range_index_dive_limit default has been set to 10 in
> 10.4.3. I see some differ
get back to
> you on this.
>
> > commit b4696ee97e6846ba49ef203cfc7189f50c1e53a7
> > Author: Varun Gupta
> > Date: Mon May 20 15:14:30 2019 +0530
> >
> > MDEV-15777: Support Early NULLs filtering-like restrictions in the
> range optimizer
> >
> > For eqjoin condi
Hi Igor,
After discussing with Sergey, we came up with these conclusions as to why
we used the approach of going through all the keyuses in the KEYUSE array
Cases to consider:
we have an index on column a
1) a OP const
where OP can be (not_null_tables() currently, but not not_null_columns()).
b)
bf3949c80
> > author: Varun Gupta
> > committer: Varun Gupta
> > timestamp: 2020-04-12 21:05:36 +0530
> > message:
> >
> > MDEV-13266: Race condition in ANALYZE TABLE / statistics collection
> >
> > Fixing a race condition while collecting the engi
input below.
>
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 02:58:31PM +0530, Varun wrote:
> > revision-id: c776cad5f8ecf2675510deeb55724d7255a52503
> (mariadb-10.4.11-267-gc776cad5f8e)
> > parent(s): cc0dca366357651ddb549e31a12b1ecd39c7380e
> > author: Varun Gupta
> > committer:
Hi Sergey,
On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 7:41 PM Sergey Petrunia wrote:
> Hi Varun,
>
> I was looking at the code for MDEV-21829, trying to understand whether
> there
> are any issues with how Unique object was extended to handle variable-size
> keys.
>
> == TREE object (the RB tree) ==
>
> TREE (th
dc305c8dd8)
> > parent(s): 043bd85a574a88856ab9c6d497e682ed06fe45e9
> > author: Varun Gupta
> > committer: Varun Gupta
> > timestamp: 2020-12-28 14:12:14 +0530
> > message:
> >
> > MDEV-19620: Changing join_buffer_size causes different results
> >
> > The scenario here is that
Hey, I am Varun and this year I wish to take part in Google Summer of Code
2016 . I have been looking around the project ideas on the ideas page of
MariaDB and am interested in the idea 'AGGREGATE STORE FUNCTIONS' .
It would be helpful if someone could guide me where should i start looking
to get m
Well i have checked out the syntax for the databases for aggregate
functions. I thought using the syntax similar to that of HSQL would be
good. In it if we are having N tuples then we are computing the values for
the N rows and then after that we make another call and return the value
for the funct
;
> On Mar 02, Varun Gupta wrote:
> > Well i have checked out the syntax for the databases for aggregate
> > functions. I thought using the syntax similar to that of HSQL would be
> > good. In it if we are having N tuples then we are computing the values
> for
> > th
stand what you mean by not using declared argument directly.
Well at least the cursor method looks far simpler from the ones we
discussed earlier .
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 6:41 PM, Sergei Golubchik wrote:
> Hi, Varun!
>
> On Mar 02, Varun Gupta wrote:
> > Well in HSQL we have the
With the syntax more or less clear to us , can we have a discussion about
how we have to go on with the implementation for the aggregate functions.
Firstly I thought I should look at the implementation of CREATE FUNCTION,
any other suggestions ?
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Varun Gupta
wrote
details have
to be there in the implementation of the aggregate functions.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:21 PM, Sergei Golubchik wrote:
> Hi, Varun!
>
> On Mar 04, Varun Gupta wrote:
> > With the syntax more or less clear to us, can we have a discussion about
> > how we h
Hi Sergei,
Thanks that answers my question, I will soon get back with questions .
On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Sergei Golubchik wrote:
> Hi, Varun!
>
> On Mar 06, Varun Gupta wrote:
> > Hi Sergei,
> > I understand that having a cursor like syntax we would have to writ
Hi Sergei,
I have gone through the code you suggested. I have got a good understanding
of what the code actually does. So now I wanted to start writing the
proposal for the idea. Can you tell me what all is needed to written in the
proposal. I am asking for a template or something that could guide
bchik wrote:
> Hi, Varun!
>
> On Mar 21, Varun Gupta wrote:
> > Hi Sergei,
> >
> > 4) :create an Item_sum_sp to be able to use aggregate stored functions in
> >queries.
> > Does this mean we can have the aggregate stored functions in the SELECT ,
> &
Hi Sergei,
Sorry for the inconvenience , now you can comment on the document :)
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Sergei Golubchik wrote:
> Hi, Varun!
>
> On Mar 22, Varun Gupta wrote:
> > Hi Sergei ,
> > I have created a draft proposal and submitted to summerofcode w
Hi,
I have added the AGGREGATE keyword to the parser . Here is the link to the
repository https://github.com/varunraiko/aggregate-functions .
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 9:50 PM, Sanja wrote:
> Hi!
>
> If we get it automatically then of course it should be done, but I
> doubts... We will see.
>
> O
, 20 May 2016 at 08:29, Sanja wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Have you read our discussion about automatic aggregate functions
>> detection?
>> Am 20.05.2016 07:15 schrieb "Varun Gupta" :
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> I have added the AGGREGATE keyword t
Hi,
As in my previous mail I have added the FETCH statement to the parser and
have tested it, when the syntax is correct . Now I am writing test that
would also give an error for incorrect syntax. Also I would like how to
proceed further :).
___
Mailing l
t; have to be perfect the first time, but this way you'll get a try at
> designing an implementation idea.
>
> Great job so far!
> Vicentiu
>
> On Mon, 23 May 2016 at 09:04 Varun Gupta wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> As in my previous mail I have added the FETCH statement t
art. If you get completely stuck, let us know. :)
>>
>> Vicentiu
>>
>> On Tue, 24 May 2016 at 11:30 Sanja wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, the decision is right. I'll check later the code on github.
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Varun Gu
Hi,
I have added the test where I have put both ALTER,CREATE and SHOW FUNCTION
queries. Should I make separate test for the queries or clubbing them in
one is fine .
On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 7:25 PM, Varun Gupta
wrote:
> Hi,
> I have also written a test for the alter, show and create fun
Hi,
Here is the week 2 report
WEEK 2
dire = mariadb/server
task - adding 'aggregate' field to the mysql.proc table.
sub tasks
1) aggregate field ---> mysql.proc table
2)create function -> aggregate and non-aggregate
3)show create function > aggregate and non-aggregate
4)drop function
Hi,
As GSOC is nearing its end, I have written a blog which contains how can
aggregate functions be written and executed to get the desired results.In
the blog I also have added the technical details of this project on
aggregate functions.
Here are the links:
Jira issue: https://jira.mariadb.org/
Hi Sergey,
On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 5:52 PM Sergey Petrunia wrote:
> Hi Varun,
>
> (This email is not the complete input, and not the most important part of
> the
> input. More to follow. I think it's better to split input into multiple
> smaller
> pieces, it's easier to track, and you get to se
30 matches
Mail list logo
