db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kathey Marsden <kmarsdende...@sbcglobal.net>
Subject Re: [jira] Updated: (DERBY-243) connection toString should uniquely identify the connection
Date Fri, 03 Jun 2005 22:23:45 GMT
Sunitha Kambhampati wrote:

> Although I havent looked at the diffs yet, but I applied the patch in
> Derby-243 to see how the derby.log would look with
> derby.language.logStatementText=true
>
> I notice now the output is a little hard to read with all the numbers
> and letters to look at, but I guess thats OK since thats what we
> decided on.
>
Well we should do the right thing.  I was willing to concede to UUID's
but I really don't have to look at those logs all the time.
I really hate to bring this up now, but after thinking about the error
stream stuff and reviewing Dag's new test  I have some new thoughts on
this issue myself and these are as follows.
     * The switch to UUID's was to guarantee uniqueness in  the case
where we have multiple
         class loaders running multiple Derby systems in the same jvm.

    *  If you do have multiple Derby systems in the same JVM,  you need
to use the
        derby.stream.error.*  properties to get your error log output
separated. 
        (the default derby.log will just get clobbered by the multiple
systems.)
   
     *  If we stick with integers  I think we get a unique id in each
stream so have clear separation of connection id's.

David can you convince me again that we need UUID's?  Sorry to bring
this all up again #:(


Kathey



Mime
View raw message