[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12368773 ]
Rick Hillegas commented on DERBY-819:
-
Thanks for the changes, Anurag. The jdbc4 tests now pass cleanly. Derbyall had
3 failures for me (wisconsin, Stream, and SURTest); ho
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12368085 ]
John H. Embretsen commented on DERBY-819:
-
I just wanted to point out some minor comment typos, in case you want to fix
them in the next revision:
Index: java/engine/o
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12368049 ]
Rick Hillegas commented on DERBY-819:
-
A couple more comments:
1) TestJDBC40Exception fails when I run the jdbc4 suite. It incurs a
permissions exception.
2) While you're
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12367712 ]
Anurag Shekhar commented on DERBY-819:
--
Hi Rick
I will modfy the comments.
There is no problem with DerbyJUnitTest its behaving perfectly fine ie
returning networked conn
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12367710 ]
Rick Hillegas commented on DERBY-819:
-
Hi Anurag,
Thanks for the explanation and the new patch. I believe that Dan's BLOCKERs are
addressed. However, I have a couple sugge
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12367604 ]
Anurag Shekhar commented on DERBY-819:
--
There were some ? chars in SystemProcedures.java )all of them in comments) I
checked my files It apears to me that some how there w
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12367599 ]
Rick Hillegas commented on DERBY-819:
-
It appears to me that 2 of the BLOCKER issues have been addressed:
1) The startup NPE has been fixed by a static intializer, as recom
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12366723 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-819:
-
- I think the changes to SystemProcedure are in comments, so I don't think it
would affect derbyall, but the changes
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12366720 ]
David Van Couvering commented on DERBY-819:
---
Dan, thanks for catching these, multiple eyes really help.
I thought I just didn't understand some of the internals whe
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12366696 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-819:
-
more review on derby819_2.diff
I would like to see some comments in the code indicating what functionality is
lost
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12366695 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-819:
-
review derby819_2.diff
-1 veto still in place: If these BLOCKER issues are addressed, the veto is
lifted
- Sy
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
[snip]
I believe these were driven (according to the patch notes) because of
the bug in 983. Ie. leave Util.notImplemented() as its old
implementation so the client could (incorrectly) continue to call it,
and modify the engine to use the new mechanism. Ie. the cl
David W. Van Couvering wrote:
> As far as I can tell, DERBY-983 only makes it so the notImplemented()
> method no longer has to live in Util.java. I thought there was still a
> need for an exception factory so in JDBC4 we can create the appropriate
> SQLException subclass. Am I missing something
As far as I can tell, DERBY-983 only makes it so the notImplemented()
method no longer has to live in Util.java. I thought there was still a
need for an exception factory so in JDBC4 we can create the appropriate
SQLException subclass. Am I missing something?
I did ask Anurag to link DERBY-9
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_1239 ]
David Van Couvering commented on DERBY-819:
---
Hi, Anurag. This is looking really good. Just a few small comments:
- Maybe I have this wrong, but is there value in st
David W. Van Couvering wrote:
> Yes, it works now, let me take a look.
>
> Dan, is your veto cleared?
have to look at the patch, I'd given up on trying to load it, I'll try
again.
I'd actually thought DERBY-983 would be fixed first and then this patch
updated to reflect that, since the majority
Yes, it works now, let me take a look.
Dan, is your veto cleared?
David
Anurag Shekhar wrote:
Can you please try to download now ? I am able to get it currectly now.
it should have 3035 lines
anurag
David Van Couvering (JIRA) wrote:
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=co
Can you please try to download now ? I am able to get it currectly now.
it should have 3035 lines
anurag
David Van Couvering (JIRA) wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12366570 ]
David Van Couvering commented on DERBY-819:
---
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12366570 ]
David Van Couvering commented on DERBY-819:
---
Hi, Anurag, can you send this patch over email, I seem to be getting a
corrupted version through JIRA.
Thanks,
David
>
What's the benefit of having the embedded driver not call the
Util.notImplemented() method and thus increasing the footprint for no value?
Wouldn't fixing the client's use first make sense? Then the
Util.notImplemented() method could remain.
Dan.
I have added a new issue and attached a pat
Anurag Shekhar wrote:
> I thought of fixing this as part of this patch but I wasn't sure if its
> a good idea to mix two issues in
> one patch so I have just added comment in Util saying this needs to be
> fixed. I will open a jira issue
> for this. Once that is fixed Util won't be having any metho
Thanks, Anurag.
Regards,
-Rick
Anurag Shekhar wrote:
I thought of fixing this as part of this patch but I wasn't sure if
its a good idea to mix two issues in
one patch so I have just added comment in Util saying this needs to be
fixed. I will open a jira issue
for this. Once that is fixed Uti
I thought of fixing this as part of this patch but I wasn't sure if its
a good idea to mix two issues in
one patch so I have just added comment in Util saying this needs to be
fixed. I will open a jira issue
for this. Once that is fixed Util won't be having any method to create
exception
anurag
I concur, the network client should *not* be using
Util.notImplemented(), and this needs to be fixed.
David
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
Anurag Shekhar (JIRA) wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12366069 ]
Anurag Shekhar commented on DERBY-819:
Anurag Shekhar (JIRA) wrote:
> [
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12366069
> ]
>
> Anurag Shekhar commented on DERBY-819:
> --
>
> Description of patch
Thanks for the description, it greatly helps the reviewers.
I
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12366069 ]
Anurag Shekhar commented on DERBY-819:
--
Description of patch
InternalDriver
added method to create ExceptionFactory. This method can be overwritten
in subclass to
Bryan Pendleton wrote:
>> The patch derby-819_2.diff seems to b e truncated for me when I
>> download it, here's the end of the file.
>
> Same thing happened to me, FWIW.
>
> Also, the JIRA screen looks a little weird (formatting wrong, etc.).
>
> Maybe JIRA is having a bad evening.
and a bad m
The patch derby-819_2.diff seems to b e truncated for me when I download it,
here's the end of the file.
Same thing happened to me, FWIW.
Also, the JIRA screen looks a little weird (formatting wrong, etc.).
Maybe JIRA is having a bad evening.
thanks,
bryan
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12366006 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-819:
-
The patch derby-819_2.diff seems to b e truncated for me when I download it,
here's the end of the file.
In addition
Dan, what's your status with this patch? As it stands your -1 is
still holding it back.
This is not the complete patch i will posting is shortly
OK, thanks, sounds good.
Dan, what's your status with this patch? As it stands your -1 is still
holding it back.
David
Anurag Shekhar wrote:
- If I have this right, the exceptionFactory doesn't get initialized
until the first instance of InternalDriver() is created. Isn't it
possible
- If I have this right, the exceptionFactory doesn't get initialized until the
first instance of InternalDriver() is created. Isn't it possible that
getExceptionFactory() will return null? Doesn't this mean that at some point
during pre-boot I'll get a NullPointerException if I try to thro
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12364274 ]
David Van Couvering commented on DERBY-819:
---
Hi, Anurag, thanks for this preview, here are some comments
- I don't understand why the getSQLException() method takes b
Hi, Anurag, this sounds interesting, I generally like this kind of
approach over creating hardcoded specific SQLException classes in our
code. We should be able to solve this in a way that is less hardcoded
and more flexible, which is always good for long-term maintainability.
I don't quite
Hi, Anurag, this sounds interesting, I generally like this kind of
approach over creating hardcoded specific SQLException classes in our
code. We should be able to solve this in a way that is less hardcoded
and more flexible, which is always good for long-term maintainability.
I don't quite g
Would it be acceptable for there to continue to be a static method in
Util that worked as it does today, always returning a
java.sql.SQLException? This method would have sanity checks to ensure
that the SQLState passed in did not start wiht any of the special values
that require specific sub-cla
Looks like we already have some problem.
org.apache.derby.iapi.sql.conn.ConnectionUtil.getCurrentLCC throws
SQLException
with status set as SQLState.NO_CURRENT_CONNECTION (0803). It doesn't use
Util and constructs the SQLException directly.
Changing this to use Util is the easy part but this sta
Anurag Shekhar wrote:
>>
> I checked the classes calling using Util to get the SQLException either
> already have the reference of InternalDriver or they can be easily
> modified to have this reference. There appears to be 1 problem class
> EmbedResultSetMetaData.
>
> EmbedResultSetMetaData is b
-1
The use of InternalDriver.activeDriver() to obtain a factory exposes Derby to
potential NullPointerExceptions in a shutdown or error on boot situation. I see
that you saw one in your testing as you have a comment on that in the shutdown
code. Such NPEs will hide the real error from users,
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12363832 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-819:
-
-1
The use of InternalDriver.activeDriver() to obtain a factory exposes Derby to
potential NullPointerExceptions in a
Ah, that's right, I forgot about your veto. I'll await your decision on
that.
David
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
David Van Couvering (JIRA) wrote:
If you can fix the two formatting issues, I'll be happy to do a test build and
testrun and check this in.
Having first ensured that any ve
David Van Couvering (JIRA) wrote:
> If you can fix the two formatting issues, I'll be happy to do a test build
> and testrun and check this in.
Having first ensured that any veto's have been lifted. :-)
Dan.
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12363759 ]
David Van Couvering commented on DERBY-819:
---
Hi, Anurag. I'm looking at the latest patch. This actually looks quite good,
but I do have some formatting comments. I
Just to be clear, I didn't mean set the locale to your "local locale"
but set your "local locale" to be en_US
I think Dan raises a good point -- if you don't print out the error
messages then this issue goes away, which was what I am rooting for anyway.
David
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
An
Anurag Shekhar wrote:
> I didn't get it David if Its set to local locale it should fail unless
> the expected output was generated for the same locale.
I think the point is that the test should follow the same pattern as
other tests, not be an exception. It's either a test harness issue (it
shoul
I didn't get it David if Its set to local locale it should fail unless
the expected output was generated for the same locale.
anurag
On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 12:04 -0800, David W. Van Couvering wrote:
> So it seems to me the right thing to do is to set your local locale :),
> and not hardcode it in
So it seems to me the right thing to do is to set your local locale :),
and not hardcode it in the tests. Anurag, have you tried this?
Thanks,
David
Knut Anders Hatlen wrote:
"David W. Van Couvering" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Anurag Shekhar wrote:
Hi David
I will made the changes.
ple
"David W. Van Couvering" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Anurag Shekhar wrote:
>> Hi David
>> I will made the changes.
>> please see inline
>> thanks
>> anurag
>> David Van Couvering (JIRA) wrote:
>>
>>> - Why do you set the territory to en_US?
>>>
>>>
>> I am printing the message so in case the def
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12363205 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-819:
-
Index:
java/testing/org/apache/derbyTesting/functionTests/tests/jdbc4/TestException_app.properties
==
Anurag Shekhar wrote:
Hi David
I will made the changes.
please see inline
thanks
anurag
David Van Couvering (JIRA) wrote:
- Why do you set the territory to en_US?
I am printing the message so in case the default locale is not the same
as I used to generate the original out file it will
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12363193 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-819:
-
The method Driver40.getJDBC40Exception() can never return null but its caller
checks for a null return. This methodsh
Anurag, go to bed!
:)
David
Anurag Shekhar wrote:
Hi David
I executed derbyall on solaris10-x86. There were 10 failures.
But none of them were related to ExbeddedException or Exception message
The failed tests on the non netwerk side are
derbyall/derbyall.fail:lang/wisconsin.java
derbyall/derb
Hi David
I will made the changes.
please see inline
thanks
anurag
David Van Couvering (JIRA) wrote:
- Why do you set the territory to en_US?
I am printing the message so in case the default locale is not the same
as I used to generate the original out file it will fail. So I am
setting te
Hi David
I executed derbyall on solaris10-x86. There were 10 failures.
But none of them were related to ExbeddedException or Exception message
The failed tests on the non netwerk side are
derbyall/derbyall.fail:lang/wisconsin.java
derbyall/derbyall.fail:tools/iepnegativetests.sql
derbyall/derbyall
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12363187 ]
David Van Couvering commented on DERBY-819:
---
Hi, Anurag, Thanksk for this patch. In general this looks pretty
straightforward.
Here are some comments
- It would b
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12363186 ]
David Van Couvering commented on DERBY-819:
---
Quick question: what tests did you run, and what were the results? For future
patches, it's great to provide this inform
Anurag Shekhar (JIRA) wrote:
> [
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12363013
> ]
>
> Anurag Shekhar commented on DERBY-819:
> --
>
> SQLExceptionFactory checks for jvm version and if the jvm version is jvm16 or
> above
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12363013 ]
Anurag Shekhar commented on DERBY-819:
--
SQLExceptionFactory checks for jvm version and if the jvm version is jvm16 or
above
it will instantiate JDBC40ExceptionFactory. As
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12362978 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-819:
-
A locktimeout exception should throw a SQLTransactionRollbackException rollback
exception and not a SQLTimeoutExcepti
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-819?page=comments#action_12362976 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-819:
-
-1 on the patch
No comments on any of the new code. I couldn't understand why there is a
JDBC40SQLExceptionFactory
60 matches
Mail list logo
