NOTE:: Before reporting an issue, make sure you are running the latest version, currently 3.3.1
|Anonymous | Login | Signup for a new account||19-08-17 17:49 BST|
|My View | View Issues | Change Log | Roadmap|
|View Issue Details|
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0015394||phplist application||Message Send Process||public||20-12-09 14:44||20-01-10 14:47|
|Target Version||Fixed in Version||4.0.x|
|Summary||0015394: processqueue database 1064 error near interval|
|Description||We are using phplist svn revision 1703.|
Whenever we try to process message queue (processqueue.php) we get the following error:
Database error 1064 while doing query You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near 'interval) as newembargo , current_timestamp + cast(repeatinterval || ' minute' ' at line 1
However the message is sent succesfully.
|Additional Information||I suppose the message has something to do with these lines of code at connect.php:|
= 'select *'
. ' , embargo + cast(repeatinterval || \' minute\' as interval) as newembargo'
. ' , current_timestamp + cast(repeatinterval || \' minute\' as interval) as newembargo2'
. ' , current_timestamp < embargo + cast(repeatinterval || \'minute\' as interval) as isfuture'
. ' from %s'
. ' where id = ?'
. ' and current_timestamp < repeatuntil';
$query = sprintf($query, $GLOBALS['tables']['message']);
$rs = Sql_Query_Params($query, array($msgid));
$msgdata = Sql_Fetch_Array($rs);
PHP 5.2.4-2ubuntu5.9 with Suhosin-Patch 0.9.6.2 (cli) (built: Nov 26 2009 14:00:44)
mysql Ver 14.12 Distrib 5.0.51a, for debian-linux-gnu (i486) using readline 5.2
|Tags||No tags attached.|
|Attached Files||newembargo_error_fixed_some_innodb_reverted.diff [^] (1,761 bytes) 20-01-10 09:09 [Show Content]|
I have attached a patch that reverses the conflictive sentence to its former mysql form.
If there has to be a rewritten to innodb I suppose it should be somewhat compatible with mysql syntax (as it was not here).
I hope that the new innodb implementation (branch) solves these kind of issues.
you mean adodb :-) not innodb, but yes, many adodb changes have broken the code, and things like this should get it back in shape. Thanks
|Copyright © 2000 - 2017 MantisBT Team|