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: More. Trouble with JVMInfo
Date Tue, 27 Sep 2011 16:46:31 GMT
On 9/27/2011 7:26 AM, Knut Anders Hatlen wrote:
> Another question is whether mixed versions is a configuration we need 
> to support (I don't think it's stated explicitly anywhere that we 
> actually do support it?).
Years ago, I know this support was very important to several  of our 
large consumers, but perhaps needs have changed. I am sure those that 
expressed  the need for this to keep working are not up to 10.7 yet.   I 
had thought CompatibiltyTest was doing the basic testing for mixed 
jars.  I guess though, that test is just for basic protocol testing and 
must use separate class loaders or the basic testing would have  
failed.  Certainly, I think I could personally, better justify asking 
the users that asked for mixed jars to workaround the issue with a 
separate class loader than to ask all our consumers to change their 
documentation and support procedures with multiple sysinfo commands.  I 
will check with some consumers and report back.

I do think the  suites.All mixed version protocol testing is important 
as it usually finds issues,  but I am sure we can fix JVMInfo for the 
current issue and find a way to run these tests  moving forward.  I 
think there is already an issue open for an option  to run them with 
client in a separate class loader.

Anyway, I think a good short term solution is to get JVMInfo out of 
sysinfo to get things running again (DERBY-1046), release 10.8.2   and 
then do some more extensive research on the need for mixed classes.

As an aside, did we have a recent report of a sealing violation because 
of shared classes?  I thought we did but I can't seem to find it now.



View raw message