| Private message bug revisited? [message #1656] |
Sat, 20 April 2002 20:08  |
 |
npetreley
Messages: 10
Registered: April 2002
Location: Right here.
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
I saw the thread below on this, but this started happening to me after I upgraded to 1.2.7. I downloaded the ppost.php that was included in one of the responses in the thread below and tried that, but it didn't fix the problem. Any idea what's going on here?
Here's what I get when I attempt to send a private message:
Query Failed: INSERT INTO fud_pmsg ( ouser_id, duser_id, to_list, ip_addr, host_name, post_stamp, icon, mailed, folder_id, subject, attach_cnt, smiley_disabled, show_sig, track, read_stamp, ref_msg_id ) VALUES( 2, 2, 'jhood', '64.170.109.179', NULL, 1019333244, NULL, 'Y', 'DRAFT', 'Re: Meeting you in person', 0, 'N', 'N', 'N', 1019333244, 'R12' )
Reason: Unknown column 'ref_msg_id' in 'field list'
From: /var/www/petreley/forum/ppost.php
Server Version: 3.23.49-log
|
|
|
|
| Re: Private message bug revisited? [message #1658 is a reply to message #1656] |
Sat, 20 April 2002 20:21  |
Ilia
Messages: 13241
Registered: January 2002
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member
Administrator
Core Developer |
|
|
If you downloaded ppost AFTER upgrading you probably reversed the fix in the 1.2.7 release.
Which version of the forum you were ugrading from?
The problem appears to be the fact your fud_pmsg is missing a field....
Can you show me the output of the following MySQL query:
SHOW FIELDS FROM fud_pmsg;
FUDforum Core Developer
[Updated on: Sat, 20 April 2002 20:23] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Private message bug revisited? [message #1697 is a reply to message #1658] |
Sun, 21 April 2002 07:09 |
|
npetreley
Messages: 10
Registered: April 2002
Location: Right here.
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Yes, the ref_msg_id field is definitely missing if it's supposed to be there. I upgraded from 1.2.4 to 1.2.7. Was this field supposed to be added by the update PHP program? If so, perhaps it was prevented from doing so by a locking issue or something like that (although I seem to recall a message during the update about it locking the database).
+-----------------+---------------------------------------------+------+--- --+---------+----------------+
| Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra |
+-----------------+---------------------------------------------+------+--- --+---------+----------------+
| id | int(10) unsigned | | PRI | NULL | auto_increment |
| to_list | text | YES | | NULL | |
| ouser_id | int(10) unsigned | | | 0 | |
| duser_id | int(10) unsigned | | MUL | 0 | |
| ip_addr | varchar(15) | | | 0.0.0.0 | |
| host_name | varchar(255) | YES | | NULL | |
| post_stamp | int(10) unsigned | | | 0 | |
| read_stamp | int(10) unsigned | | | 0 | |
| icon | varchar(100) | YES | | NULL | |
| mailed | enum('Y','N') | | | Y | |
| folder_id | enum('INBOX','SENT','DRAFT','TRASH','PROC') | | | PROC | |
| subject | varchar(100) | | | | |
| attach_cnt | int(10) unsigned | | | 0 | |
| show_sig | enum('Y','N') | | | Y | |
| smiley_disabled | enum('Y','N') | | | N | |
| track | enum('Y','N','SENT') | | | N | |
| offset | int(10) unsigned | | | 0 | |
| length | int(10) unsigned | | | 0 | |
| nrf_status | enum('N','R','F') | | | N | |
+-----------------+---------------------------------------------+------+--- --+---------+----------------+
19 rows in set (0.00 sec)
|
|
|
|
| Re: Private message bug revisited? [message #1698 is a reply to message #1697] |
Sun, 21 April 2002 07:17 |
|
npetreley
Messages: 10
Registered: April 2002
Location: Right here.
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
I just looked at the update php script, and I saw the alter table command for that field (under 1.2.5).
I applied the change to the table manually, and private messaging works now.
Is there any other data definition stuff in there that is likely to have failed (or was passed over for some reason) that could cause problems later on?
[Updated on: Sun, 21 April 2002 07:20] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Private message bug revisited? [message #1701 is a reply to message #1698] |
Sun, 21 April 2002 15:55 |
Ilia
Messages: 13241
Registered: January 2002
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member
Administrator
Core Developer |
|
|
Nope, that was the only query that was ran past 1.2.5....
I am not sure why it wasn't run when you did the update...
I'll assume its a bug and see if I can replicate it.
FUDforum Core Developer
|
|
|
|
Calendar
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
]