db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David W. Van Couvering" <David.Vancouver...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Server and client compatibility test for 10.2 and 10.1
Date Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:01:07 GMT
I looked at the failure in checkDataSource (see below) and it's not 
clear to me why running with a 10.1 client and a 10.2 server should 
cause this error to occur (see below - it happens twice).

Note that the underlying EmbedConnection is the same, but the wrapping 
BrokeredConnection is different (which actually is correct).  This seems 
like a bug in the test, actually.

I'll log a JIRA, I have some other things on my plate that are higher 
priority for me.  If someone feels this is blocking them, please up the 
priority in the JIRA item, let me know, and I'll get on it.

I'll include a hint on how to fix it if anyone is motivated to jump on this.

David

java.lang.Exception: Two connections from the same pooled connection 
have different string values: 
org.apache.derby.iapi.jdbc.BrokeredConnection30@19492125, Wrapped 
Connection = org.apache.derby.impl.jdbc.EmbedConnection30@22199751 (XID 
= 164), (SESSIONID = 33), (DATABASE = wombat), (DRDAID = null) , 
org.apache.derby.iapi.jdbc.BrokeredConnection30@12231451, Wrapped 
Connection = org.apache.derby.impl.jdbc.EmbedConnection30@22199751 (XID 
= 164),  SESSIONID = 33), (DATABASE = wombat), (DRDAID = null)



Kathey Marsden wrote:
> Ramandeep Kaur wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hi,
>>
>>I ran regression testing with 10.2.0.0 alpha - 372715 (except
>>derbyTesting.jar) and 10.1 derbyTesting.jar file.
>>
>>Summary
>>--------------
>>OS: Windows 2000, JVM: sun jdk 142
>>599 Tests Run
>>90% Pass (536 tests passed)
>>10% Fail (63 tests failed)
>>1 Suites skipped
>> 
>>
> 
> Thanks so much Raman.  Maybe file a Jira Task  to analyze the results.
> Perhaps folks will recognize tests on the list affected by areas where
> they worked or are interested in doing a more comprehensive analysis. 
> I  would  interested to see the reasons that tests failed so we could
> consider.those cases for automating this testing.
> 
> On a *super* brief browse the checkDataSource diff  looked interesting. 
> Perhaps David could tell us if that is expected or not.
> 
> Kathey
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message