| Bug #45293 | Conversion on "x86" supports bigger precision than expected (funcs_1.storedproc) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Submitted: | 3 Jun 2009 10:18 | Modified: | 17 Feb 2021 13:14 |
| Reporter: | Joerg Bruehe | Email Updates: | |
| Status: | Unsupported | Impact on me: | |
| Category: | Tests: Server | Severity: | S3 (Non-critical) |
| Version: | 5.1.31 and up | OS: | Any (Using x86, not OS X) |
| Assigned to: | Bernt Marius Johnsen | CPU Architecture: | Any |
| Tags: | disabled, pb2, test failure, tf54 | ||
[16 Jun 2009 10:22]
Alexander Nozdrin
It fails in PB2 on test-max-win_ws2008-x86_64 with the following symptoms: -------------------------------------------------------- @@ -16799,7 +16799,7 @@ END// SELECT fn50(4.29e+09); fn50(4.29e+09) -4290000000 +2147483648 DROP FUNCTION IF EXISTS fn51; CREATE FUNCTION fn51( f1 int unsigned zerofill) returns int unsigned zerofill BEGIN @@ -16808,7 +16808,7 @@ END// SELECT fn51(4.29e+09); fn51(4.29e+09) -4290000000 +2147483648 DROP FUNCTION IF EXISTS fn52; CREATE FUNCTION fn52( f1 int zerofill) returns int zerofill BEGIN @@ -17930,7 +17930,7 @@ END// CALL sp50(4.29e+09); f1 -4290000000 +2147483648 DROP PROCEDURE IF EXISTS sp51; CREATE PROCEDURE sp51( f1 int unsigned zerofill) BEGIN @@ -17939,7 +17939,7 @@ END// CALL sp51(4.29e+09); f1 -4290000000 +2147483648 DROP PROCEDURE IF EXISTS sp52; CREATE PROCEDURE sp52( f1 int zerofill) BEGIN @@ -21392,9 +21392,9 @@ END// CALL spexecute81(); f1 f2 f3 f4 f5 f6 f7 f8 f9 f10 f11 f12 -4290000000 4290000000 4290000010 -9220000000000000000 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 -9220000000000000000 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 -9220000000000000000 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 +2147483648 2147483648 2147483658 -9220000000000000000 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 -9220000000000000000 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 -9220000000000000000 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 var1 var2 var3 var4 var5 var6 var7 var8 -4290000000 4290000010 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 +2147483648 2147483658 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 DROP PROCEDURE spexecute81; DROP PROCEDURE sp81; DROP PROCEDURE IF EXISTS sp82; @@ -21426,9 +21426,9 @@ END// CALL spexecute82(); f1 f2 f3 f4 f5 f6 f7 f8 f9 f10 f11 f12 -4290000000 4290000000 4290000010 -9220000000000000000 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 -9220000000000000000 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 -9220000000000000000 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 +2147483648 2147483648 2147483658 -9220000000000000000 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 -9220000000000000000 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 -9220000000000000000 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 var1 var2 var3 var4 var5 var6 var7 var8 -4290000000 4290000010 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 +2147483648 2147483658 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 6744073709551616 DROP PROCEDURE spexecute82; DROP PROCEDURE sp82; DROP PROCEDURE IF EXISTS sp83; --------------------------------------------------------
[23 Jun 2009 12:05]
Bernt Marius Johnsen
The Win64 behaviour is reported in Bug#37746. I proceed with the supression of warnings that Horst suggested.
[23 Jun 2009 12:32]
Bugs System
A patch for this bug has been committed. After review, it may be pushed to the relevant source trees for release in the next version. You can access the patch from: http://lists.mysql.com/commits/76915 2973 Bernt M. Johnsen 2009-06-23 Bug#45293 Supressed some warnings
[23 Jun 2009 12:33]
Bernt Marius Johnsen
Supressed warnings (And By the way.... it was Joerg that suggested the solution, sorry).
[23 Jun 2009 13:38]
Matthias Leich
ok to push - The code changes fix the problem in a correct way. - storedproc.test passed my test checking with - high load on testing box - various MTR options This was just for checking if there are other unknown weaknesses outside of this bug.
[24 Jun 2009 10:56]
Bugs System
A patch for this bug has been committed. After review, it may be pushed to the relevant source trees for release in the next version. You can access the patch from: http://lists.mysql.com/commits/77015 2973 Bernt M. Johnsen 2009-06-24 [merge] Bug#45293 Prepared on 5.1 gca branch
[24 Jun 2009 11:08]
Bugs System
A patch for this bug has been committed. After review, it may be pushed to the relevant source trees for release in the next version. You can access the patch from: http://lists.mysql.com/commits/77018 3391 Bernt M. Johnsen 2009-06-24 [merge] Bug#45293 Prepared on pe (5.4) gca branch
[8 Jul 2009 13:30]
Bugs System
Pushed into 5.1.37 (revid:joro@sun.com-20090708131116-kyz8iotbum8w9yic) (version source revid:bernt.johnsen@sun.com-20090624105553-k08jof6bph9o3opr) (merge vers: 5.1.37) (pib:11)
[9 Jul 2009 7:36]
Bugs System
Pushed into 5.1.37 (revid:joro@sun.com-20090708131116-kyz8iotbum8w9yic) (version source revid:bernt.johnsen@sun.com-20090624105553-k08jof6bph9o3opr) (merge vers: 5.1.37) (pib:11)
[10 Jul 2009 11:20]
Bugs System
Pushed into 5.4.4-alpha (revid:anozdrin@bk-internal.mysql.com-20090710111017-bnh2cau84ug1hvei) (version source revid:bernt.johnsen@sun.com-20090624111522-2uac6amfbn3491ao) (merge vers: 5.4.4-alpha) (pib:11)
[10 Jul 2009 15:22]
Paul DuBois
Test case changes. No changelog entry needed.
[23 Jul 2009 10:21]
Alexander Nozdrin
Re-opening, since suite/funcs_1/t/storedproc.test still has disabled pieces due to this bug.
[26 Aug 2009 13:46]
Bugs System
Pushed into 5.1.37-ndb-7.0.8 (revid:jonas@mysql.com-20090826132541-yablppc59e3yb54l) (version source revid:jonas@mysql.com-20090826132541-yablppc59e3yb54l) (merge vers: 5.1.37-ndb-7.0.8) (pib:11)
[26 Aug 2009 13:46]
Bugs System
Pushed into 5.1.37-ndb-6.3.27 (revid:jonas@mysql.com-20090826105955-bkj027t47gfbamnc) (version source revid:jonas@mysql.com-20090826105955-bkj027t47gfbamnc) (merge vers: 5.1.37-ndb-6.3.27) (pib:11)
[26 Aug 2009 13:48]
Bugs System
Pushed into 5.1.37-ndb-6.2.19 (revid:jonas@mysql.com-20090825194404-37rtosk049t9koc4) (version source revid:jonas@mysql.com-20090825194404-37rtosk049t9koc4) (merge vers: 5.1.37-ndb-6.2.19) (pib:11)
[27 Aug 2009 16:32]
Bugs System
Pushed into 5.1.35-ndb-7.1.0 (revid:magnus.blaudd@sun.com-20090827163030-6o3kk6r2oua159hr) (version source revid:jonas@mysql.com-20090826132541-yablppc59e3yb54l) (merge vers: 5.1.37-ndb-7.0.8) (pib:11)
[21 Oct 2015 22:23]
Emmanuel ROY
why it's truncation not duplication of a bit ? I don't understand all, but it could be usefull for me to understand ...
Description: It seems this bug went unreported ... In all current builds of 5.1, starting with 5.1.31, we have this test failure: ===== funcs_1.storedproc [ retry-fail ] Test ended at YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS CURRENT_TEST: funcs_1.storedproc --- /PATH/mysql-test/suite/funcs_1/r/storedproc.result +++ /PATH/mysql-test/suite/funcs_1/r/storedproc.reject @@ -18241,8 +18241,6 @@ CALL sp70_n(-1e+40); f1 -10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 -Warnings: -Note 1265 Data truncated for column 'f1' at row 1 CALL sp70_n( -10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 ); f1 -10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 @@ -18255,8 +18253,6 @@ CALL sp71_nu(1.00e+40); f1 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 -Warnings: -Note 1265 Data truncated for column 'f1' at row 1 CALL sp71_nu( 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 ); f1 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 @@ -18269,8 +18265,6 @@ CALL sp72_nuz(1.00e+40); f1 0000000000000000000000010000000000000000000000000000000000000000 -Warnings: -Note 1265 Data truncated for column 'f1' at row 1 CALL sp72_nuz( 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 ); f1 0000000000000000000000010000000000000000000000000000000000000000 @@ -18283,8 +18277,6 @@ CALL sp73_n_z(1.00e+40); f1 0000000000000000000000010000000000000000000000000000000000000000 -Warnings: -Note 1265 Data truncated for column 'f1' at row 1 CALL sp73_n_z( 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 ); f1 0000000000000000000000010000000000000000000000000000000000000000 mysqltest: Result content mismatch - saving '/PATH/mysql-test/var/log/funcs_1.storedproc/' to '/PATH/mysql-test/var/log/funcs_1.storedproc/' Test has failed 2 times, no more retries! ===== How to repeat: Run the test suite ... Suggested fix: I'm not sure it is a problem if an expected (and tolerated) truncation doesn't happen. Note that it is only expected if the value is given in E-notation; giving the same value in integer notation passes without any warning on all platforms. However, it is a problem in building if a test fails. Assuming the non-truncation does not indicate a problem, I propose to just suppress the warning.