MySQL 5.1 シリーズの最新バージョン、MySQL 5.1.39 がリリースされました。
このバージョンにも、前バージョン(MySQL 5.1.38) で同梱された InnoDB Plugin 1.0.4 が含まれています。

ダウンロードはこちらから：
http://dev.mysql.com/downloads/mysql/5.1.html

-----------------
以下チェンジログ：

■バグ修正：
* Partitioning: An INSERT ... SELECT statement on an empty
partition of a partitioned table failed with ERROR 1030
(HY000): Got error 124 from storage engine. This issue also
caused queries run against a partitioned table while a LOAD
DATA CONCURRENT INFILE statement was in progress to fail with
the same error. (Bug#46639: http://bugs.mysql.com/46639)
See also Bug#35845: http://bugs.mysql.com/35845,
Bug#44657: http://bugs.mysql.com/44657,
Bug#45840: http://bugs.mysql.com/45840.

* Partitioning: A partitioned table having a TIMESTAMP column
with a default value of CURRENT_TIMESTAMP and this column was
not defined using an ON UPDATE option, an ALTER TABLE ...
REORGANIZE PARTITION statement on the table caused the
TIMESTAMP column value to be set to CURRENT_TIMESTAMP
regardless. (Bug#46478: http://bugs.mysql.com/46478)

* Partitioning: Attempting to access a partitioned table when
partitioning support was disabled in a MySQL server binary
that had been compiled with partitioning support caused the
server to crash. (Bug#39893: http://bugs.mysql.com/39893)

* Partitioning: The use of TO_DAYS() in the partitioning
expression led to selection failures when the column having
the date value contained invalid dates. This occurred because
the function returns NULL in such cases, and the partition
containing NULL values was pruned away. For example, this
problem occurred if '2001-02-00' was inserted into a DATE
column of such a table, and a subsequent query on this table
used WHERE date_col < '2001-02-00' --- while '2001-01-01' is
less than '2001-02-00', TO_DAYS('2001-02-00') evaluates as
NULL, and so the row containing '2001-01-01' was not returned.
Now, for tables using RANGE or LIST partitioning and having
TO_DAYS() in the partitioning expression, the NULL partition
is also scanned instead of being ignored.
The fix for this issue also corrects misbehavior such that a
query of the form SELECT * FROM table WHERE date_col <
date_val on a table partitioned by RANGE or LIST was handled
as though the server SQL mode included ALLOW_INVALID_DATES
even if this was not actually part of the server SQL mode at
the time the query was issued.
(Bug#20577: http://bugs.mysql.com/20577)
See also Bug#18198: http://bugs.mysql.com/18198,
Bug#32021: http://bugs.mysql.com/32021,
Bug#46362: http://bugs.mysql.com/46362.

* Replication: Performing a multi-row update of the
AUTO_INCREMENT column of a transactional table could result in
an inconsistency between master and slave when there was a
trigger on the transactional table that updated a
non-transactional table. When such an update failed on the
master, no rows were updated on the master, but some rows
could (erroneously) be updated on the slave.
(Bug#46864: http://bugs.mysql.com/46864)

* Replication: When using the --replicate-rewrite-db option and
the database referenced by this option on the master was the
current database when the connection to the slave was closed,
any temporary tables existing in this database were not
properly dropped. (Bug#46861: http://bugs.mysql.com/46861)

* Replication: When a statement that changed both transactional
and non-transactional tables failed, the transactional changes
were automatically rolled back on the master but the slave
ignored the error and did not roll them back, thus leading to
inconsistencies between master and slave.
This issue is fixed by automatically rolling back a statement
that fails on the slave; however, the transaction is not
rolled back unless a corresponding ROLLBACK statement is found
in the relay log file.
(Bug#46130: http://bugs.mysql.com/46130)
See also Bug#33864: http://bugs.mysql.com/33864.

* Replication: When slave_transaction_retries is set, a
statement that replicates, but is then rolled back due to a
deadlock on the slave, should be retried. However, in certain
cases, replication was stopped with error 1213 (Deadlock found
when trying to get lock; try restarting transaction) instead,
even when this variable was set.
(Bug#45694: http://bugs.mysql.com/45694)

* Replication: The binary logging behavior (and thus, the
replication behavior) of CREATE DATABASE IF NOT EXISTS, CREATE
TABLE IF NOT EXISTS, and CREATE EVENT IF NOT EXISTS was not
consistent among these statements, nor with that of DROP
DATABASE IF EXISTS, DROP TABLE IF EXISTS, and DROP EVENT IF
EXISTS: A DROP ... IF EXISTS statement is always logged even
if the database object named in the statement does not exist.
However, of the CREATE ... IF NOT EXISTS statements, only the
CREATE EVENT IF NOT EXISTS statement was logged when the
database object named in the statement already existed.
Now, every CREATE ... IF NOT EXISTS statement is written to
the binary log (and thus replicated), whether the database
object named in the statement exists or not. For more
information, see Section 16.3.1.3, "Replication of CREATE ...
IF NOT EXISTS Statements."
Exception. Replication and logging of CREATE TABLE IF NOT
EXISTS ... SELECT continues to be handled according to
existing rules. See Section 16.3.1.4, "Replication of CREATE
TABLE ... SELECT Statements," for more information.
(Bug#45574: http://bugs.mysql.com/45574)

* Replication: When using statement-based replication,
database-level character sets were not always honored by the
replication SQL thread. This could cause data inserted on the
master using LOAD DATA to be replicated using the wrong
character set.

Note
This was not an issue when using row-based replication.
(Bug#45516: http://bugs.mysql.com/45516)

* Replication: In some cases, a STOP SLAVE statement could cause
the replication slave to crash. This issue was specific to
MySQL on Windows or Macintosh platforms.
(Bug#45238: http://bugs.mysql.com/45238,
Bug#45242: http://bugs.mysql.com/45242,
Bug#45243: http://bugs.mysql.com/45243,
Bug#46013: http://bugs.mysql.com/46013,
Bug#46014: http://bugs.mysql.com/46014,
Bug#46030: http://bugs.mysql.com/46030)

* Replication: Creating a scheduled event whose DEFINER clause
was either set to CURRENT_USER or not set explicitly caused
the master and the slave to become inconsistent. This issue
stems from the fact that, in both cases, the DEFINER is set to
the CURRENT_USER of the current thread. (On the master, the
CURRENT_USER is the mysqld user; on the slave, the
CURRENT_USER is empty.)
This behavior has been modified as follows:

+ If CURRENT_USER is used as the DEFINER, it is replaced
with the value of CURRENT_USER before the CREATE EVENT
statement is written to the binary log.

+ If the definer is not set explicitly, a DEFINER clause
using the value of CURRENT_USER is added to the CREATE
EVENT statement before it is written to the binary log.
(Bug#44331: http://bugs.mysql.com/44331)
See also Bug#42217: http://bugs.mysql.com/42217.

* Replication: When using the statement-based logging format,
the only possible safe combination of transactional and
non-transactional statements within the same transaction is to
perform any updates on non-transactional tables (such as
MyISAM tables) first, before updating any transactional tables
(such as those using the InnoDB storage engine). This is due
to the fact that, although a modification made to a
non-transactional table is immediately visible to other
connections, the update is not immediately written to the
binary log, which can lead to inconsistencies between master
and slave. (Other combinations may hide a causal dependency,
thus making it impossible to write statements updating
non-transactional tables to the binary log in the correct
order.)
However, in some cases, this situation was not handled
properly, and the determination whether a given statement was
safe or not under these conditions was not always correct. In
particular, a multi-table update that affected both
transactional and non-transactional tables or a statement
modifying data in a non-transactional table having a trigger
that operated on a transactional table (or the reverse) was
not determined to be unsafe when it should have been.
With this fix, the following determinations regarding
replication safety are made when combining updates to
transactional and non-transactional tables within the same
transaction in statement-based logging mode:

1. Any statement modifying data in a non-transactional table
within a given transaction is considered safe if it is
issued prior to any data modification statement accessing
a transactional table within the same transaction.

2. A statement that updates transactional tables only is
always considered safe.

3. A statement affecting both transactional and
non-transactional tables within a transaction is always
considered unsafe. It is not necessary that both tables
be modified for this to be true; for example, a statement
such as INSERT INTO innodb_table SELECT * FROM
myisam_table is also considered unsafe.

Note
The current fix is valid only when using statement-based
logging mode; we plan to address similar issues occurring when
using the MIXED or ROW format in a future MySQL release.
(Bug#28976: http://bugs.mysql.com/28976)

* Stack overflow checking did not account for the size of the
structure stored in the heap.
(Bug#46807: http://bugs.mysql.com/46807)

* In queries for which the loose index scan access method was
chosen, using a condition of the form col_name rather than the
equivalent col_name <> 0 caused an assertion failure.
(Bug#46607: http://bugs.mysql.com/46607)

* Killing a query that was performing a sort could result in a
memory leak. (Bug#45962: http://bugs.mysql.com/45962)

* Truncation of DECIMAL values could lead to assertion failures;
for example, when deducing the type of a table column from a
literal DECIMAL value.
(Bug#45261: http://bugs.mysql.com/45261)

* Bulk insert performance could suffer with large
read_buffer_size values.
(Bug#44723: http://bugs.mysql.com/44723)

* A buffer overflow could occur during handling of IS NULL
ranges. (Bug#37044: http://bugs.mysql.com/37044)

* mysqladmin --wait ping crashed on Windows systems.
(Bug#35132: http://bugs.mysql.com/35132)