Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update Field update / result Updated [CORE903] #1301

Closed
firebird-issue-importer opened this issue Aug 18, 2006 · 28 comments
Closed

Update Field update / result Updated [CORE903] #1301

firebird-issue-importer opened this issue Aug 18, 2006 · 28 comments

Comments

@firebird-issue-importer

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

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Aug 18, 2006

Commented by: @asfernandes

Eduardo, the information that you provided is not sufficient to understant.

What is incorrect?

Could you attach a backup?

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Aug 18, 2006

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

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Aug 18, 2006

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.

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Aug 18, 2006

Commented by: Eduardo (sremulador)

only 3.0 :(, trank

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Aug 25, 2006

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.

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Aug 25, 2006

Modified by: @dyemanov

assignee: Dmitry Yemanov [ dimitr ]

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Aug 25, 2006

Modified by: @dyemanov

Version: 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 ] =>

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Nov 16, 2007

Modified by: @dyemanov

Target: 2.5.0 [ 10221 ]

Fix Version: 2.5 Alpha 1 [ 10224 ]

Fix Version: 3.0.0 [ 10048 ] =>

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Jan 28, 2008

Modified by: @pcisar

Workflow: jira [ 11163 ] => Firebird [ 15321 ]

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Feb 20, 2008

Modified by: @dyemanov

status: Open [ 1 ] => Open [ 1 ]

Fix Version: 2.5 Beta 1 [ 10251 ]

Fix Version: 2.5 Alpha 1 [ 10224 ] =>

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Aug 13, 2008

Modified by: @dyemanov

status: Open [ 1 ] => In Progress [ 3 ]

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Aug 25, 2008

Modified by: @dyemanov

status: In Progress [ 3 ] => Open [ 1 ]

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Aug 25, 2008

Modified by: @dyemanov

status: Open [ 1 ] => Resolved [ 5 ]

resolution: Fixed [ 1 ]

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Nov 11, 2008

Modified by: @dyemanov

Version: 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 ]

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Nov 11, 2008

Modified by: @dyemanov

Link: This issue is duplicated by CORE2177 [ CORE2177 ]

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Nov 13, 2008

Commented by: Eugenk Konkov (kes)

I have installed new instance of 2.0.3 Firebird
Is there some options on server side to not use this existing behaviour?
I do not need new value of field before it will updated

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Nov 14, 2008

Commented by: @dyemanov

No, there's no workaround, sorry. The proper behavior is implemented in v2.5 only.

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Feb 18, 2009

Modified by: @dyemanov

Link: This issue is duplicated by CORE2330 [ CORE2330 ]

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Feb 23, 2011

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.

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Feb 23, 2011

Commented by: @dyemanov

Pavel, it was fixed (or implemented, if you wish) in v2.5, see my last comment here.

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Feb 23, 2011

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?

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Feb 23, 2011

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.

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Feb 23, 2011

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.

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Feb 23, 2011

Modified by: @pcisar

Link: This issue is related to QA351 [ QA351 ]

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Apr 20, 2011

Commented by: @pcisar

QA test added.

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Apr 20, 2011

Modified by: @pcisar

status: Resolved [ 5 ] => Closed [ 6 ]

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Jan 19, 2016

Modified by: @pavel-zotov

QA Status: No test

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

firebird-issue-importer commented Jan 19, 2016

Modified by: @pavel-zotov

QA Status: No test => Done successfully

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment