SEO

IBM Informix Dynamic Server Version 10.00.UC5 on redhat

Try this:
SELECT MIN(colno) FROM syscolumns WHERE colno>=1 AND colno>1
An the answer is ..... 1

A know that stupid questions generates stupid answers but still....

Anyone has come to that?

piotrek wrote:
> IBM Informix Dynamic Server Version 10.00.UC5 on redhat
>
> Try this:
> SELECT MIN(colno) FROM syscolumns WHERE colno>=1 AND colno>1
> An the answer is ..... 1
> A know that stupid questions generates stupid answers but still....
>
> Anyone has come to that?
>
>
>
Works fine on 10.00.UC1 on SuSE.

I just tried this on recent builds of the next-to-be-released 10.00, 11.10,
and 11.50 versions (currently these are numbered 10.00.xC9, 11.10.xC2W3,
11.50.xC2; of course these numbers might change and my posting this is no
guarantee from IBM that these will necessarily be released...), and it
worked correctly on all of them. All of these were on 64-bit x86 Linux. The
same query also worked against a regular table on all of them. (sysmaster
tables are not normal tables -- they are what we call pseudotables. The code
to access them produces them out of thin air, or rather out of the contents
of memory on the fly, so it's possible for some things to be broken for
particular sysmaster tables that work correctly for other sysmaster tables
and normal tables.)

This has the flavor of a bug that has already been found and fixed in later
fixpacks. I will ask the optimizer team if they know of any such fix having
been done.

--
Kevin Cherkauer
Software Engineer
IBM Informix Dynamic Server -- Database Kernel


"piotrek" <piotrUSUN_T_O110@o2.pl> wrote in message
news:fvsfda$4q7$1@pippin.nask.net.pl...
> IBM Informix Dynamic Server Version 10.00.UC5 on redhat
>
> Try this:
> SELECT MIN(colno) FROM syscolumns WHERE colno>=1 AND colno>1
> An the answer is ..... 1
> A know that stupid questions generates stupid answers but still....
>
> Anyone has come to that?

Bingjie Miao on the optimizer team tells me this bug was indeed fixed
already. He already sent a reply posting via a moderated feed, so it should
arrive here eventually. :-)

--
Kevin Cherkauer
Software Engineer
IBM Informix Dynamic Server -- Database Kernel


"Kevin Cherkauer" <invalid_address@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:fvt3g8$c9o$1@aioe.org...
>I just tried this on recent builds of the next-to-be-released 10.00, 11.10,
>and 11.50 versions (currently these are numbered 10.00.xC9, 11.10.xC2W3,
>11.50.xC2; of course these numbers might change and my posting this is no
>guarantee from IBM that these will necessarily be released...), and it
>worked correctly on all of them. All of these were on 64-bit x86 Linux. The
>same query also worked against a regular table on all of them. (sysmaster
>tables are not normal tables -- they are what we call pseudotables. The
>code to access them produces them out of thin air, or rather out of the
>contents of memory on the fly, so it's possible for some things to be
>broken for particular sysmaster tables that work correctly for other
>sysmaster tables and normal tables.)
>
> This has the flavor of a bug that has already been found and fixed in
> later fixpacks. I will ask the optimizer team if they know of any such fix
> having been done.
>
> --
> Kevin Cherkauer
> Software Engineer
> IBM Informix Dynamic Server -- Database Kernel
>
>
> "piotrek" <piotrUSUN_T_O110@o2.pl> wrote in message
> news:fvsfda$4q7$1@pippin.nask.net.pl...
>> IBM Informix Dynamic Server Version 10.00.UC5 on redhat
>>
>> Try this:
>> SELECT MIN(colno) FROM syscolumns WHERE colno>=1 AND colno>1
>> An the answer is ..... 1
>> A know that stupid questions generates stupid answers but still....
>>
>> Anyone has come to that?
>
>

This problem exists on the following versions:

9.40: 9.40.xC8W2 through 9.40.xC8W7, 9.40.xC9, should be fixed by
9.40.xC9W1 and above.
10.00: 10.00.xC5, 10.00.xC6, should be fixed by 10.00.xC6W1 and above
including 10.00.xC7 and 10.00.xC8.

It does not exist in 11.10 and above.

Bingjie Miao


"Kevin Cherkauer" <invalid_address@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:fvt7jp$adn$1@aioe.org...
> Bingjie Miao on the optimizer team tells me this bug was indeed fixed
> already. He already sent a reply posting via a moderated feed, so it
> should arrive here eventually. :-)
>
> --
> Kevin Cherkauer
> Software Engineer
> IBM Informix Dynamic Server -- Database Kernel
>
>
> "Kevin Cherkauer" <invalid_address@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:fvt3g8$c9o$1@aioe.org...
>>I just tried this on recent builds of the next-to-be-released 10.00,
>>11.10, and 11.50 versions (currently these are numbered 10.00.xC9,
>>11.10.xC2W3, 11.50.xC2; of course these numbers might change and my
>>posting this is no guarantee from IBM that these will necessarily be
>>released...), and it worked correctly on all of them. All of these were on
>>64-bit x86 Linux. The same query also worked against a regular table on
>>all of them. (sysmaster tables are not normal tables -- they are what we
>>call pseudotables. The code to access them produces them out of thin air,
>>or rather out of the contents of memory on the fly, so it's possible for
>>some things to be broken for particular sysmaster tables that work
>>correctly for other sysmaster tables and normal tables.)
>>
>> This has the flavor of a bug that has already been found and fixed in
>> later fixpacks. I will ask the optimizer team if they know of any such
>> fix having been done.
>>
>> --
>> Kevin Cherkauer
>> Software Engineer
>> IBM Informix Dynamic Server -- Database Kernel
>>
>>
>> "piotrek" <piotrUSUN_T_O110@o2.pl> wrote in message
>> news:fvsfda$4q7$1@pippin.nask.net.pl...
>>> IBM Informix Dynamic Server Version 10.00.UC5 on redhat
>>>
>>> Try this:
>>> SELECT MIN(colno) FROM syscolumns WHERE colno>=1 AND colno>1
>>> An the answer is ..... 1
>>> A know that stupid questions generates stupid answers but still....
>>>
>>> Anyone has come to that?
>>
>>
>
>

one more short question:
How to obtain fix?
Sure - I can find it on fixcentral but as far as I know our client has no
more active support...


"Bingjie Miao" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:fvteot$p16$1@aioe.org...
> This problem exists on the following versions:
>
> 9.40: 9.40.xC8W2 through 9.40.xC8W7, 9.40.xC9, should be fixed by
> 9.40.xC9W1 and above.
> 10.00: 10.00.xC5, 10.00.xC6, should be fixed by 10.00.xC6W1 and above
> including 10.00.xC7 and 10.00.xC8.
>
> It does not exist in 11.10 and above.
>
> Bingjie Miao
>
>
> "Kevin Cherkauer" <invalid_address@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:fvt7jp$adn$1@aioe.org...
>> Bingjie Miao on the optimizer team tells me this bug was indeed fixed
>> already. He already sent a reply posting via a moderated feed, so it
>> should arrive here eventually. :-)
>>
>> --
>> Kevin Cherkauer
>> Software Engineer
>> IBM Informix Dynamic Server -- Database Kernel
>>
>>
>> "Kevin Cherkauer" <invalid_address@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:fvt3g8$c9o$1@aioe.org...
>>>I just tried this on recent builds of the next-to-be-released 10.00,
>>>11.10, and 11.50 versions (currently these are numbered 10.00.xC9,
>>>11.10.xC2W3, 11.50.xC2; of course these numbers might change and my
>>>posting this is no guarantee from IBM that these will necessarily be
>>>released...), and it worked correctly on all of them. All of these were
>>>on 64-bit x86 Linux. The same query also worked against a regular table
>>>on all of them. (sysmaster tables are not normal tables -- they are what
>>>we call pseudotables. The code to access them produces them out of thin
>>>air, or rather out of the contents of memory on the fly, so it's possible
>>>for some things to be broken for particular sysmaster tables that work
>>>correctly for other sysmaster tables and normal tables.)
>>>
>>> This has the flavor of a bug that has already been found and fixed in
>>> later fixpacks. I will ask the optimizer team if they know of any such
>>> fix having been done.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Kevin Cherkauer
>>> Software Engineer
>>> IBM Informix Dynamic Server -- Database Kernel
>>>
>>>
>>> "piotrek" <piotrUSUN_T_O110@o2.pl> wrote in message
>>> news:fvsfda$4q7$1@pippin.nask.net.pl...
>>>> IBM Informix Dynamic Server Version 10.00.UC5 on redhat
>>>>
>>>> Try this:
>>>> SELECT MIN(colno) FROM syscolumns WHERE colno>=1 AND colno>1
>>>> An the answer is ..... 1
>>>> A know that stupid questions generates stupid answers but still....
>>>>
>>>> Anyone has come to that?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>

"piotrek" <piotrUSUN_T_O110@o2.pl> wrote in message
news:fvufun$d14$1@pippin.nask.net.pl...
> one more short question:
> How to obtain fix?
> Sure - I can find it on fixcentral but as far as I know our client has no
> more active support...
>

In other words:
is it true that we have to pay extra for any (even most critical) fix to
IDS??
If so - this makes Informix an unique rdbms (or any other) software
vendor...
Especially taking into account IDS buggynes....

On 8 May, 11:12, "piotrek" <piotrUSUN_T_O...@o2.pl> wrote:
> "piotrek" <piotrUSUN_T_O...@o2.pl> wrote in message
>
> news:fvufun$d14$1@pippin.nask.net.pl...
>
> > one more short question:
> > How to obtain fix?
> > Sure - I can find it on fixcentral but as far as I know our client has no
> > more active support...
>
> In other words:
> is it true that we have to pay extra for any (even most critical) fix to
> IDS??
> If so - this makes Informix an unique rdbms (or any other) software
> vendor...
> Especially taking into account IDS buggynes....

How do you Larry Ellision has billions and can afford one of the
biggest boats in the world? By paying people to create patches
and then not charging for them? Believe me he is not making a loss on
oracle...and neither are microsoft or db2 or sybase otherwise
they would soon go out of business...

Why it is we have these people who think all software development
companies should be run at a loss? Fucking idiots...

> Why it is we have these people who think all software development
> companies should be run at a loss? Fucking idiots...
>

sure, that's my point - especially as as I am software developer (and after
work I am used to whip myself )...
So according to your wisdom when buying a software you cannot relay on it
(event on basic functionality like selecting right data from databse).
Instead you have to pay for constant upgrades to new versions.
And install them with new features and new bugs to find one day that 2+2=5.
Ok - I will try to pomote this model in our company
(but I think that's a privliege of huge enterprises)
regards

"piotrek" <piotrUSUN_T_O110@o2.pl> wrote in message
news:g01gi5$7ob$1@pippin.nask.net.pl...
>
>> Why it is we have these people who think all software development
>> companies should be run at a loss? Fucking idiots...
>>
>
> sure, that's my point - especially as as I am software developer (and
> after work I am used to whip myself )...
> So according to your wisdom when buying a software you cannot relay on it
> (event on basic functionality like selecting right data from databse).
> Instead you have to pay for constant upgrades to new versions.
> And install them with new features and new bugs to find one day that
> 2+2=5.
> Ok - I will try to pomote this model in our company
> (but I think that's a privliege of huge enterprises)
> regards

To be fair, you will have ahad a year's maintenance on the software product
you bought. Has it taken over a year to discover the fault?