Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of rick.hillegas@oracle.com
 designates 141.146.126.69 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <516564F1.4020802@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:11:13 -0700
From: Rick Hillegas <rick.hillegas@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: derby-dev@db.apache.org
Subject: Re: should attempts to shut down the database timeout if they exceed
 DriverManager.setLoginTimeout( N )?
References: <51647E0C.2000600@sbcglobal.net>
In-Reply-To: <51647E0C.2000600@sbcglobal.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 4/9/13 1:46 PM, Mike Matrigali wrote:
> Derby uses making a connection to shutdown the database, and in 
> DERBY-6122 it looks like that attempt to shutdown the database
> can timeout.
Thanks for raising this issue, Mike. Login timeouts could interfere with 
orderly shutdown for several reasons, including:

A) Network problems which slow down LDAP authentication.

B) Heavily loaded databases which need a lot of time to quiesce.

If login timeouts turn out to be a problem for orderly shutdown, one 
solution might be to implement an alternative api for bringing down a 
database and/or engine. See this very old enhancement request: 
DERBY-586. From time to time we get static about these two features of 
the Derby shutdown api:

1) It's quirky to shutdown via a startup api.

2) It's annoying that a successful shutdown results in an exception 
which the application has to catch.

>
> I do wonder if this is what a user would expect?
Probably not. But with or without timeouts, the Derby shutdown api isn't 
what people coming from other databases expect. I think we have to live 
with this additional kink as long as we overload the JDBC connection api 
this way.

Thanks,
-Rick
>
> /mikem
>