Skip to content

Percona XtraDB 8.0.34-26.1 benchmark with HabberDB 4.9 build schema issue #666

Answered by sm-shaw
phaneesh asked this question in Q&A
Discussion options

You must be logged in to vote

It looks like Percona is returning a badly formed version number to the SQL select version() when we are checking to see if the version supports invisible primary keys.

As we don't explicitly test Percona then this is not a HammerDB bug - this is what we are looking for in version numbers that MySQL supports and it looks like Percona doesn't follow this format with the string 34-26. This is not best practice as it's not possible to compare higher/lower numbers with 34-26?.

VERSION NUMBERS
Version numbers consist of one or more decimal numbers separated by dots, such as 2 or 1.162 or 3.1.13.1. The first number is called the major version number. Larger numbers correspond to later versions …

Replies: 1 comment 2 replies

Comment options

You must be logged in to vote
2 replies
@phaneesh
Comment options

@sm-shaw
Comment options

Answer selected by phaneesh
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Category
Q&A
Labels
None yet
2 participants