db-derby-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From malesch <male...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Different DB behavior loaded from JAR vs. file system
Date Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:07:57 GMT
Hi Dag

I connect to my DB with the same user name with the default schema APP
and, what I forgot to mention last time, the DB is encrypted.

Now while creating a little program to demonstrate the effect I stumbled
over something pointing to a possible explanation :-). I realized that
in my demo with the extracted DB (on the file system) the expected
tables didn't show up (like in the JAR case). Disappointed I opened the
same DB with SquirellSQL and, surprise, the tables were there again.
After this opening with SquirellSQL my demo programm showed again the
previously missing tables.

Is there some transaction log which is not commited and what would be
the reason for this (simply not properly commiting/closing the DB?)

Greetings,
marcus


Dag H. Wanvik wrote:
> malesch <malesch@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> I am seeing some very strange behavior with my Derby DB
>> (version 10.4.2.0 and 10.5.3.0).
>>
>> If I load my DB from a JAR file, I am missing some table
>> entries, that are existing if I extract the DB from the
>> same JAR file and load it from the file system.
>>
>> How can I understand this behavior, is there an
>> explanation for this?
> 
> That seems weird. Are you connecting with the same user name (or none)
> in the two scenarios? Occasionally we see users miss some tables
> because they end up in an unexpected schema; the default schema is the
> user name (or "APP" if not provided).
> 
> If this is not the issue, are you able to provide a repro for it?
> 
> Thanks,
> Dag


Mime
View raw message