maria-developers team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: 21eb8969ce9: Improved storage size for Item, Field and some other classes
On Sep 25, Michael Widenius wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 1:10 PM Sergei Golubchik <serg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi, Monty!
> > Looks ok, but again it doesn't seem you've squashed intermediate commits
> > as you said you did.
> I have squashed everything that makes sense.
> I did leave commits that shows me trying with bit fields and then moving to
> flags as these can be useful for anyone following the development process.
> It also allows one to checkout the bitfield code and run tests with it.
I'd rather see commits to "run tests with it" in a separate branch,
like, 10.6-bitfields. Not in the main branch, they only muddle the
history and complicate change analysys.
If you'd like I can create a separate branch for bitfields and
squash commits in the main branch into something that is easier to
> > Bit fields and non-existent commits in columnstore - it's is clearly an
> > intermediate work-in-progress state, all fixed in your later commits.
> For columnstore I added a commit on top to allow columnstore to compile,
> yes. That was the best way to get this work done.
> As soon I have pushed, I hope the columnstore team will take the
> patches and add it to standard columnstore...
Right. But non-existent commits mean you cannot check out the bitfield
code and run tests with it. It won't compile because columnstore will
fail to check out and cmake will stop before any compilation will even
be able to start.
VP of MariaDB Server Engineering