Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: local policy)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3)
In-Reply-To: <5DEADBBC-F191-4AC3-8F84-95E40379B4FD@iq80.com>
References: <85E87C6B-7AA7-4695-9BE0-0331FBD080AC@iq80.com>
 <02465772-E341-4DE4-93B5-77C02DB2E6D2@planet57.com>
 <5DEADBBC-F191-4AC3-8F84-95E40379B4FD@iq80.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <88D37969-4710-4BB7-BC16-C5D4B6BC3C3E@hogstrom.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Matt Hogstrom <matt@hogstrom.org>
Subject: Re: Should we cancel 1.2?
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 21:24:09 -0400
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org

Yup.

In my testing CMP mode as well as JDBC mode was working fine.  The  
new runtime Mode Chris had added to DayTrader was failing.  The  
problem manifested itself in two different ways.  One manifestation I  
saw was an exhaustion of the connection pool and a flurry of  
connection timeouts.  The second was a concurrent modification  
exception.  I believe they may be the same problem.

It only occurred running underload when more than one client was  
accessing the system at a time.  I didn't get much further than  
that.  I started adding some debug code but was waffling between 1.2  
and 2.0.

The next step is to start adding some code to OEJB 2.x.


On Jul 16, 2007, at 8:55 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:

> It was some connector thing Matt found.  Matt can you fill Jason in  
> on the details?
>
> -dain
>
> On Jul 16, 2007, at 2:02 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>
>> What were the bugs that were to be "quickly fixed"?  I forget its  
>> been so long.
>>
>> Why not just push it out asis?
>>
>> --jason
>>
>>
>> On Jul 16, 2007, at 9:53 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>>
>>> 1.2 has been sitting in a branch for well over 6 months now.   
>>> Originally, it was going to be delayed so some bugs could be  
>>> "quickly fixed", but it doesn't look like that is ever going to  
>>> happen.  I'm not really interested in being the manager for this  
>>> release anymore, but if there is good interest in getting this  
>>> released in, say, the next two weeks, I'm willing to continue  
>>> on.  Otherwise, someone else can take over.
>>>
>>> So, does anyone care about releasing 1.2?
>>>
>>> -dain
>>
>
>