Mailing-List: contact derby-user-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Derby Discussion" <derby-user@db.apache.org>
Received-SPF: error (idunn.apache.osuosl.org: domain sbcglobal.net from
 32.97.182.141 cause and error)
Message-ID: <4506E9CE.1010800@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 10:09:34 -0700
From: Kathey Marsden <kmarsdenderby@sbcglobal.net>
Reply-To: kmarsdenderby@sbcglobal.net
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
 rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20060414
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Derby Discussion <derby-user@db.apache.org>
Subject: User community role 10.2 testing of optimizer changes
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In the licencing discussion,  I mentioned that we really need more user 
feedback before we release 10.2.
Discussion has occurred on the developer list  on that point and is on 
this thread. 
http://www.nabble.com/10.2-plans-%28was-Re%3A-10.2-licensing-issue%29-tf2256208.html

The summary is that right now the development community is not in a 
position to work on any known regression and we should release to 
motivate users to try 10.2. Kathy Saunders probably summed it up the 
concern best when she said:

"If we really believe we need more testing, then what is that testing 
and who is going to do it? "

My opinion is that our overall confidence in the  quality  and 
robustness of Derby needs to increase release to release and we should 
feel confident about that and should communicate risk in areas that are 
likely impacted in terms that users can understand so you can either  
adjust your  expectations or do your part to bring your expectations 
back to their prior level.  Whether you count on Derby to control your 
I.V drip, use it in the critical path of your business,  or just use it 
to manage your CD collection, you have the right to know the information 
and can then assess whether you want to take your necessary role of 
flushing out optimizer issues, before or after the release.     The 
summary is this:

There were significant optimizer performance changes in 10.2 that are 
taking queries that were running for hours to seconds. (Maybe someone 
can point to the data).  These changes involve the optimizer and it is 
really not possible to have comprehensive regression tests in this 
area.  The changes in my opinion are  worth while, high quality, risky 
and regression prone.    We have had optimizer  feedback from a single 
user who exposed several issues. Other issues have been exposed by 
development.  We have fixed what we can.  We need users  especially 
those who have complex or performance sensitive queries to try their 
existing applications and give us feedback.  Army can you please give an 
overview of the changes from a functional perspective and explain what 
types of usage you think could pop issues?  Also I would like your 
opinion on the value of such testing from the user community?

Users, please register your results at:
http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/TenTwoApplicationTesting
 
Kathey