Update Field update / result Updated [CORE903] #1301
Comments
|
Commented by: @asfernandes Eduardo, the information that you provided is not sufficient to understant. What is incorrect? Could you attach a backup? |
|
Commented by: Eduardo (sremulador) my english is very bad, portuguese vension translate to english -> Estou tentando fazer um update em uma tabela CONTA_AMB_PROCED aproveitando os valores do campo CEVH e CEVL, com o calculo mensionado acima, o calculo para o CEVH esta gravando corratamente porem o do CEVL esta calculando j? com o primeiro que e do CEVH o que n?o poderia acontecer, pois ainda n?o comitei o registro, estou utilizando esta opera??o em uma SP. Obrigado |
|
Commented by: @asfernandes The problem (one updated field should continue with old value when evaluating others assignments) is already fixed in the tree but is disabled. It's scheduled to enable for V3.0 AFAIK. |
|
Commented by: Eduardo (sremulador) only 3.0 :(, trank |
|
Commented by: @dyemanov Many people rely on the existing behaviour, so we cannot change it quickly. This will be addressed in the next major version, probably along with some backward compatibility option. |
Modified by: @dyemanovassignee: Dmitry Yemanov [ dimitr ] |
Modified by: @dyemanovVersion: 1.5.3 [ 10028 ] Version: 1.5.2 [ 10027 ] Version: 1.5.0 [ 10025 ] Version: 1.0.3 [ 10006 ] Version: 1.0.2 [ 10005 ] Version: 1.0.0 [ 10003 ] Version: 1.5.1 [ 10026 ] Version: 1.0.1 [ 10004 ] Fix Version: 3.0 [ 10048 ] Version: 2.0 RC3 [ 10040 ] => |
Modified by: @dyemanovTarget: 2.5.0 [ 10221 ] Fix Version: 2.5 Alpha 1 [ 10224 ] Fix Version: 3.0.0 [ 10048 ] => |
Modified by: @pcisarWorkflow: jira [ 11163 ] => Firebird [ 15321 ] |
Modified by: @dyemanovstatus: Open [ 1 ] => Open [ 1 ] Fix Version: 2.5 Beta 1 [ 10251 ] Fix Version: 2.5 Alpha 1 [ 10224 ] => |
Modified by: @dyemanovstatus: Open [ 1 ] => In Progress [ 3 ] |
Modified by: @dyemanovstatus: In Progress [ 3 ] => Open [ 1 ] |
Modified by: @dyemanovVersion: 2.1.1 [ 10223 ] Version: 2.0.4 [ 10211 ] Version: 2.1.0 [ 10041 ] Version: 2.0.3 [ 10200 ] Version: 2.0.2 [ 10130 ] Version: 2.0.1 [ 10090 ] Version: 2.0.0 [ 10091 ] |
|
Commented by: Eugenk Konkov (kes) I have installed new instance of 2.0.3 Firebird |
|
Commented by: @dyemanov No, there's no workaround, sorry. The proper behavior is implemented in v2.5 only. |
|
Commented by: @pcisar Dmitry, could you please adjust the Fix version according to your plans? If it should appear in 3.0, the current Fix version: 2.5 Beta 1 doesn't look right to me. |
|
Commented by: @dyemanov Pavel, it was fixed (or implemented, if you wish) in v2.5, see my last comment here. |
|
Commented by: @pcisar Dmitry, I can read :) But Adriano explicitly stated that although it was implemented in 2.5 tree, it's disabled (hence not effective in 2.5 binary) and scheduled to be enabled in 3.0. So, from QA POV we can't create test for this issue against 2.5 and close the ticket until you enable the fix in some future release, and therefore it makes sense to assign Fix for version accordingly to your real plans. In fact, this ticket should be reopened (and sub-task added) as you personally hinted that this issue would need further development (backward compatibility option). Or am I completely wrong? |
|
Commented by: @dyemanov Adriano said that in 2006, there wasn't v2.5 that time :-) In fact, it was implemented (and disabled) during the v2.1 development, and it was enabled and surfaced in v2.5. The corresponding backward compatibility option is OldSetClauseSemantics in firebird.conf. |
|
Commented by: @pcisar Ouch, you're right. Now I remember I saw it in release notes :-) I've visited so many old tickets recently during general clean up that my general sense of development chronology is completely messed up and my recall paths are blurry at best. Thanks for clarification. |
|
Commented by: @pcisar QA test added. |
Modified by: @pcisarstatus: Resolved [ 5 ] => Closed [ 6 ] |
Modified by: @pavel-zotovQA Status: No test |
Modified by: @pavel-zotovQA Status: No test => Done successfully |
firebird-automations
added
affect-version: 2.0.4
affect-version: 2.1.0
affect-version: 2.0.3
affect-version: 2.0.2
affect-version: 2.0.1
affect-version: 2.0.0
affect-version: 1.5.3
affect-version: 1.5.2
affect-version: 1.5.1
affect-version: 1.5.0
affect-version: 1.0.3
affect-version: 1.0.2
affect-version: 1.0.1
affect-version: 1.0.0
fix-version: 2.5 Beta 1
resolution: fixed
priority: major
component: api / client library
type: bug
qa: done successfully
labels
Submitted by: Eduardo (sremulador)
Is duplicated by CORE2177
Is duplicated by CORE2330
Is related to QA351
UPDATE CONTA_AMB_PROCED
SET CEVH=(SELECT (((CEVH+CEVL) * CEQT) * (PNDA / 100)) FROM PROFISSIONAL_CONVENIO WHERE PNCV=:CVDD AND PNPR=(SELECT CPPR FROM CONTA_AMB_PROCED_MESTRE WHERE CPAM=CEAM AND CPCD=CECP)), CEVL=(SELECT (((CEVH+CEVL) * CEQT) * ((100-PNDA) / 100)) FROM PROFISSIONAL_CONVENIO WHERE PNCV=:CVDD AND PNPR=(SELECT CPPR FROM CONTA_AMB_PROCED_MESTRE WHERE CPAM=CEAM AND CPCD=CECP))
WHERE CEAM=(SELECT F2AM FROM FATURA_DETALHE_AMB WHERE F2F1=:FAT AND F2AM=CEAM) AND CEVC=0;
First Set CEVH = ok
Second Set CEVL = BUG
Second CEVL = 1? CEVH(UPDATED) + CEVL
Normal CEVL = (CEVL + CEVL) NO UPDATED
Commits: 99402ef 1739c54
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: