db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jørgen Løland (JIRA) <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Updated: (DERBY-974) ClientDriver can lose some connection properties
Date Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:13:51 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-974?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel

Jørgen Løland updated DERBY-974:

    Attachment: derby-974-1.stat

The attached patch, v1, fixes the bug and adds a regression test to the jdbc4 junit tests.
The regression test connects to a database with a Properties object with default value create=true.
Without the patch, the connection is refused because ClientDriver does not see the create=true
property. With the patch, the connection works as expected.

All tests pass

> ClientDriver can lose some connection properties
> ------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: DERBY-974
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-974
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Network Client
>    Affects Versions:,,
>         Environment: Linux, Sun JRE 1.5
>            Reporter: Michael Hackett
>            Assignee: Jørgen Løland
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: ClientDriver.java-diff, derby-974-1.diff, derby-974-1.stat, PropertiesTest.java
> Internally, the ClientDriver class's appendDatabaseAttributes() method uses keys() on
the connection properties to get a list of the property names. However, this misses any properties
in the default set. The correct method for a Properties object is propertyNames(). This will
return the same type of object as keys(), but will include all properties.
> (It is unfortunate that Sun chose to make Properties a subclass of Hashtable, instead
of giving Properties a Hashtable, as the former exposes too much implementation.)
> The fix is to simply replace calls to keys() on all Property objects to use propertyNames().
A quick search revealed that this is not the only place in the code base where this is done,
so a more thorough scan should be made.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message