Bug in V10 FC5??
Richard Hegewald found that after upgrading IDS 10.00 FC4 to FC5 a contradictory query on serial_id returned a row instead of none, on HP-UX Itanium and SUSE 64-bit. Jonathan Leffler said it should return nothing, so it was a bug and should go to Tech Support. Richard confirmed it with fresh tables and reported it to IBM.
Auto-generated by Claude from the posts below — may be imperfect; read the full thread.
I upgraded from V10.00fc4 to fc5 and since that moment quite a number of
programs went wrong.
We found that that the following query was different:
"select serial_id from table where serial_id >= 15 and serial_id <= 15
and (serial_id>15 and serial_id<=15)"
This query returns "no record found" in version fc4 (correct) and "15" in
version fc5 (not correct).
I did this query in dbaccess and in fact it returned the same results.
So I had to downgrade back to fc4.
This happened on hpux11 on itanium as well as on Suse linux 64bit.
Am I wrong or is it a bug of the server??
Richard
Hello Richard, Did you run any update statistics after upgrade to FC5? You may need to drop the data distributions after upgrade. -Sanjit
On 2/5/07, RICHARD HEGEWALD <r.hegewald@medoil.de> wrote:
> I upgraded from V10.00fc4 to fc5 and since that moment quite a number of
> programs went wrong.
>
> We found that that the following query was different:
>
> "select serial_id from table where serial_id >= 15 and serial_id <= 15
> and (serial_id>15 and serial_id<=15)"
>
> This query returns "no record found" in version fc4 (correct) and "15" in
> version fc5 (not correct).
>
> I did this query in dbaccess and in fact it returned the same results.
> So I had to downgrade back to fc4.
> This happened on hpux11 on itanium as well as on Suse linux 64bit.
>
> Am I wrong or is it a bug of the server??
If that is a single statement, then it should not return anything.
if it does, there is a bug of some sort.
I don't much care if the distributions got updated, either - that
might affect the speed with which you get the answer, but it should
not affect the validity of the answer.
Please report to IBM/Informix Tech Support.
--
Jonathan Leffler #include <disclaimer.h>
Email: jleffler@earthlink.net, jleffler@us.ibm.com
Guardian of DBD::Informix v2005.02 -- http://dbi.perl.org/
NB: Please do not use this email for correspondence - I don't read it
every week, even.
Thank you for yours answers, it must really be a bug and I passed it to IBM. I tested it with newly created dbs and tables and always the Version fc5 gives a wrong result while the fc4 is correct. Richard