From the store side it is interesting to test lob's that are either
smaller than a page or larger than a page - these will go through
2 separate code paths. So it would be nice if the
new tests included these boundaries. Safest would probably be to
include a 1000 byte/char lob and a 100k blob.
After that there seem to be 2 interesting boundaries:
o a lob bigger than available memory to the jvm, to test whether lob
is getting instantiated in memory or not. Hopefully at some point
we will ge to the point where this never happens but I don't think
we are there yet - especially for network server case.
o the max size lob (i forget if it is 2 gig or 2 gig-1). This test
may want to be separate as it may require resources that some
developers won't have.
Fernanda Pizzorno wrote:
I have started converting LOB related tests to Junit. The aim with this
is to document the coverage of the LOB related tests. I am interested in
finding out: (1) what is being tested, (2) what is the LOB size used to
test with (I have divided that into 3 categories Small, Medium and
Large), and (3) which of the drivers (Embedded and/or Client) is being
tested.
I have created a wiki page to keep track of which of the tests have
already been converted and had its coverage documented. This wiki page
can be found at: http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/ConvertLobTestsToJunit.
I have used jdbcapi/lobStreams.java as an example of how I thought of
documenting the test coverage. Suggestions, and help converting the
tests and documenting are very welcome :).
- Fernanda
PS: I tried to link DERBY-1888 to DERBY-1889 but I got the following error:
Errors
An error occurred: com.atlassian.jira.exception.DataAccessException:
org.ofbiz.core.entity.GenericEntityException: while inserting:
[GenericEntity:IssueLink][destination,12351773][linktype,12310010][source,12351772][sequence,null][id,12313532]
(SQL Exception while executing the following:INSERT INTO issuelink (ID,
LINKTYPE, SOURCE, DESTINATION, SEQUENCE) VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?, ?)
(Duplicate entry '12313532' for key 1))
Has anyone seen this error before?
