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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

fix(tianmu): add TIME_to_ulonglong_time_round process and fix up precision loss problem (#1173) #1895

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Jun 29, 2023
Merged

fix(tianmu): add TIME_to_ulonglong_time_round process and fix up precision loss problem (#1173) #1895

merged 3 commits into from Jun 29, 2023

Conversation

Xinqiangxu
Copy link
Collaborator

@Xinqiangxu Xinqiangxu commented Jun 19, 2023 •
edited

Summary about this PR

Issue Number: close #1173

Tests Check List

  • Unit test
  • Integration test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  • No code

Changelog

  • New Feature
  • Bug Fix
  • Performance Improvement
  • Build/Testing/CI/CD
  • Documentation
  • Not for changelog (changelog entry is not required)

Documentation

  • Affects user behaviors
  • Contains syntax changes
  • Contains variable changes
  • Contains experimental features

@Xinqiangxu
fix(tianmu): add TIME_to_ulonglong_time_round process and fix up prec…
80564d1 
…ision loss problem (stoneatom#1173)

When converting TIME/DATETIME to ulonglong numeric, tianmu engine does not take the
TIME_to_ulonglong_time_round process. This causes the results different from innodb.
Furthermore, when we close the tianmu_insert_delayed parameter and execute an insert SQL,
the TIME/DATETIME/TIMESTAMP type's data will loss precision due to incomplete attribute copying.

PR Close stoneatom#1173
@Xinqiangxu Xinqiangxu self-assigned this Jun 19, 2023
@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Jun 19, 2023

Thanks for the contribution!
I have applied any labels matching special text in your PR Changelog.

Please review the labels and make any necessary changes.

@mergify mergify bot added the PR-bug bug for pull request label Jun 19, 2023
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 19, 2023 •
edited

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 79.32% and project coverage change: +5.19 🎉

Comparison is base (6b369e5) 55.17% compared to head (4fcab22) 60.36%.

❗ Current head 4fcab22 differs from pull request most recent head 60070da. Consider uploading reports for the commit 60070da to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files 
@@                 Coverage Diff                 @@
##           stonedb-5.7-dev    #1895      +/-   ##
===================================================
+ Coverage            55.17%   60.36%   +5.19%     
===================================================
  Files                 2031     1837     -194     
  Lines               431521   380689   -50832     
===================================================
- Hits                238085   229815    -8270     
+ Misses              193436   150874   -42562
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
storage/tianmu/core/engine.cpp 64.25% <0.00%> (-3.13%) ⬇️
storage/tianmu/core/just_a_table.h 100.00% <ø> (ø)
storage/tianmu/core/query_compile.cpp 65.48% <ø> (+1.02%) ⬆️
storage/tianmu/core/table_share.h 77.77% <ø> (ø)
storage/tianmu/core/temp_table.h 58.33% <ø> (ø)
storage/tianmu/core/tianmu_table.cpp 67.97% <ø> (+0.59%) ⬆️
storage/tianmu/handler/ha_tianmu.h 81.25% <ø> (ø)
storage/tianmu/index/tianmu_table_index.h 42.85% <ø> (ø)
storage/tianmu/optimizer/aggregator_basic.h 63.45% <ø> (+9.34%) ⬆️
storage/tianmu/optimizer/compile/compiled_query.h 72.00% <ø> (ø)
... and 25 more

... and 306 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@RingsC RingsC requested review from RingsC and haitaoguan June 29, 2023 01:47
RingsC
RingsC approved these changes Jun 29, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@RingsC RingsC left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@mergify mergify bot merged commit 34b73a1 into stoneatom:stonedb-5.7-dev Jun 29, 2023
6 of 7 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@RingsC RingsC RingsC approved these changes

@haitaoguan haitaoguan haitaoguan approved these changes

@zhongshengstoneatom zhongshengstoneatom Awaiting requested review from zhongshengstoneatom

Assignees

@Xinqiangxu Xinqiangxu

Labels
PR-bug bug for pull request
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

bug: Bit Operators and Functions problems
3 participants
@Xinqiangxu @RingsC @haitaoguan