Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Message-ID: <25813562.1168475607657.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 16:33:27 -0800 (PST)
From: "Daniel John Debrunner (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: derby-dev@db.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Created: (DERBY-2229) UnsupportedVetter does not close the
 JDBC objects it opens
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

UnsupportedVetter does not close the JDBC objects it opens
----------------------------------------------------------

                 Key: DERBY-2229
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2229
             Project: Derby
          Issue Type: Bug
          Components: Test
    Affects Versions: 10.3.0.0
            Reporter: Daniel John Debrunner
            Priority: Minor


The comment at the end of connectionWorkhorse is:

// No need to close the objects. They were closed by vetObject().

but if I add an assert after that comment the test fails:

assertTrue(conn.isClosed());

(around line 495)

I don't see the close() methods being added to the list of methods to check though it's hard to follow the code, seems like it might be more obvious just to call
the close methods rather than trying to force them into the inspection phase, especially as a specific sort is needed. Do the close() methods need to be tested as part of the inspection/vetting phase?

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira