Bugs item #769469, was opened at 2003-07-11 12:22
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=769469&group_id=22866
Category: JBossWeb
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: No
===
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss1.kimptoc.net/ FOR DETAILS==
===
===
===
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss1.kimptoc.net/ FOR DETAILS==
===
===
Automated JBoss(Branch_3_2 WonderLand) Testsuite Results: 10-July-2003
JBoss daily test results
SUMMARY
Number of tests run: 1388
Successful tests: 1373
Errors:9
Failures: 6
---
Automated JBoss(Branch_3_2 WonderLand) Testsuite Results: 10-July-2003
JBoss daily test results
SUMMARY
Number of tests run: 1369
Successful tests: 1353
Errors:10
Failures: 6
--
===
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss1.kimptoc.net/ FOR DETAILS==
===
===
===
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss1.kimptoc.net/ FOR DETAILS==
===
===
===
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss1.kimptoc.net/ FOR DETAILS==
===
===
===
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://jboss1.kimptoc.net/ FOR DETAILS==
===
===
> -Original Message-
> From: Newcomb, Michael P.
> So, what do we do about it? Should
> JDBCGetGeneratedKeysCreateCommand test for Number and convert
> to expected type? Or should we urge MySQL to create the type
> based upon the type of field it is?
Actually, JDBCGetGeneratedKeysCr
> From: Alexey Loubyansky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Hello Michael,
>
> at the moment, I can't comment on why findAll works.
>
> The cause, perhapsm is the types mismatch between the one that is used
> by MySQL driver for generated keys be default and the one you
> use for primary key column.
Sacha said yesterdays snapshot was truncated. Todays definitely has it:
http://jboss.sourceforge.net/snapshots/jboss-head-snapshot.tar.gz
--
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
Michael Barker wrote:
Hi,
The snapshots do not appea
Hello Michael,
at the moment, I can't comment on why findAll works.
The cause, perhapsm is the types mismatch between the one that is used
by MySQL driver for generated keys be default and the one you
use for primary key column.
AFAIK, MySQL's default is java.lang.Integer. Abstracting from
vendo
I was getting these last night on 3.2.1 using JSPs. In my case, I
redeployed my EJBs and JSPs and the ClassCastException went away.
Hope this helps...
Nate
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 9:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sub
jboss-head from ~ July 1.
RedHat 8
JDK 1.4.1
Mysql
I have a simple bean that has auto-generated Integer primary keys.
MyLocal myLocal = myLocalHome.create(name, description);
myLocal.getName(); <-- works fine
myLocal.getDescription(); <-- works fine
myLocal.getId(); <-- Throws ClassCastException
Bugs item #769139, was opened at 2003-07-10 07:03
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by starksm
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=769139&group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority:
Bugs item #769139, was opened at 2003-07-10 17:03
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=769139&group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Resolution:
I noticed that removeDeployer does a first-to-last traversal of
deploymentList. I wondered if that was an oversight or part of some
strategy that wasn't obvious to me.
But, it gets uglier. Commenting MainDeployer.shutdown() produces a batch of
warnings from ServiceController.shutdown(), it compl
Feature Requests item #769045, was opened at 2003-07-10 13:09
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376688&aid=769045&group_id=22866
Category: JBossMX
Group: v3.2
Status: Open
Res
>The current JMS rewrite by Nathan, Adrian, and Bela is going quite well
>and we will be replacing the old system in the fall. Don't work on a
>codebase that is going to be retired and needs to live in depracated
>mode for awhile. A refactoring isn't what is needed in the JMS
>subsystem.
I don'
20 matches
Mail list logo