Re: [PR] FINERACT-274: Not able to create the same datatable which was rejected by the maker checker before [fineract]

[via GitHub]

adamsaghy commented on PR #5495:
URL: https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5495#issuecomment-3919569434

   > > I dont think any of the changes are needed.
   > > The attached integration tests are green without messing with 
transaction boundaries, neither having the "cleanup".
   > > The maker-checker is fully rolled back, so no left over data. You can 
create datatable if it was rejected priorly.
   > > Kindly asking you to double check!
   > 
   > Firstly, thank you adam for the review!
   > 
   > I did as you said and double checked by running a few tests, both in 
MariaDB and Postgres. Can I ask what database you used to check the changes? I 
think the database matters because the issue should only affect MariaDB.
   > 
   > To clarify, the behavior of the solution and tests with a Postgres 
database should be a "no-op". This is because of how MariaDB handles DDL 
statements like creating new tables. So the problem doesn't even occur when 
Postgres databases are used.
   > 
   > I tried to replicate in a few circumstances and got the results below. You 
can also see the cleanup commented out in (without cleanup) and not commented 
out in (with cleanup).
   > 
   > MariaDB (without cleanup): <img alt="Screenshot 2026-02-17 at 10 06 49 PM" 
width="1107" height="532" 
src="https://private-user-images.githubusercontent.com/30848293/551328123-38f9cd95-1811-461f-9765-115611dc66b0.png?jwt=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.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.xWG4CCVss_uPejVSEz1SbYSEw2wgIRH0BRrnkGBxCFU";>
   > 
   > MariaDB (with cleanup): <img alt="Screenshot 2026-02-17 at 10 19 26 PM" 
width="1093" height="547" 
src="https://private-user-images.githubusercontent.com/30848293/551329560-7ad506c2-b6d2-4d4e-83e4-641d7c9f2ee8.png?jwt=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.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.o28_oPpKdN12Cy-BXR6iXLOj8FVLT3cYVdISDGHfmgU";>
   > 
   > Postgres (without cleanup): <img alt="Screenshot 2026-02-17 at 10 07 51 
PM" width="1094" height="548" 
src="https://private-user-images.githubusercontent.com/30848293/551328149-edbe09b3-aa1e-4fe1-a0c8-608ad0613735.png?jwt=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.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.RyIjHRqh74o3SPmRa9csbibS_8jJl-uFaFCa1AHyqy8";>
   > 
   > As for the extra @transactional I added. This was just to ensure that the 
removal didn't happen without the rest of the items in rejectEntry(). But 
thinking about it now, I don't think this is necessary, since MariaDB will 
commit this DDL even if it is in @transactional, just like for the table 
creation. I will make another change without this in there!
   > 
   > Please let me know if there's something I missed. I understand I am new 
and thus prone to making mistakes.
   
   OMG mariadb and mysql... OMG....  :( 


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@fineract.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org