On 01/03/2012 12:49 AM, Timour Katchaounov wrote: > Hi Igor, > > The reason for removing this specific call to > engine->set_thd() was because Monty claimed this is > the correct way, and because with the new assert we > couldn't find any case where the new assert would fail. > > Apparently the above assert was incorrect, however, the > current commit message doesn't have any explanation what > was wrong, why the assert you removed is wrong, and why > it is needed to call engine->set_thd().
Igor, I would rather say that you patch did not have any explanation why you had removed the call. Should it be a reference to Monty's opinion?I have to admit it would be pretty pretty lame. Regards, Igor. > > Timour > > On 3.01.2012 06:06, Igor Babaev wrote: >> At file:///home/igor/maria/maria-5.3-bug910083/ >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> revno: 3376 >> revision-id: i...@askmonty.org-20120103040636-nc6o55vsxqadd1n0 >> parent: pser...@askmonty.org-20111230211905-he458ysn3sse6wlm >> committer: Igor Babaev<i...@askmonty.org> >> branch nick: maria-5.3-bug910083 >> timestamp: Mon 2012-01-02 20:06:36 -0800 >> message: >> Fixed LP bug #910083. >> The patch for bug 685411 erroneously removed a call of >> engine->set_thd() >> from Item_subselect::fix_fields(). >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> commits mailing list >> comm...@mariadb.org >> https://lists.askmonty.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/commits _______________________________________________ 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
