CLOB is supported by most of the databases, and Oracle is the only one with a particular API rather than plain JDBC
Quoting Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Isn't Oracle the only database to offer a CLOB? > > I think writing it to a file in the build results directory like the > other output makes perfect sense. Unless we are planning to search > them, but then maybe lucene is a better choice anyway. > > Hmm, indexed and correlated build failures. I like that idea. Shiny. / > me loses focus. > > - Brett > > On 12/03/2007, at 2:09 AM, Trygve Laugstøl wrote: > > > Jesse McConnell wrote: > >> sounds good to me, imo either trunc it or maybe switch the model over > >> to a clob for that in the db... > > > > I tried to make it a CLOB once but couldn't get it to work because > > of some JPOX issues IIRC so for alpha-1 just chop the exception and/ > > or write it to a separate file and put the ideal solution into a > > later alpha. > > > > Keep moving! > > > > -- > > Trygve > > > >> jesse > >> On 3/9/07, Stephane Nicoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> On 3/9/07, Jesse McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > I have gone through jira issues there were assigned to 1.1 and > >>> spread > >>> > things out a bit. > >>> > > >>> > here is my criteria I used in separating out the issues: > >>> > > >>> > 1.1-alpha-1 -> issues that need to be addressed asap before we > >>> pull > >>> > any kinda alpha > >>> > >>> Not because I opened this but I think CONTINUUM-1194 should be > >>> fixed. > >>> I'll try to provide a patch this sunday for this. As a summary, > >>> if an > >>> error occurs and the stacktrace is higher than 8000 chars: > >>> > >>> * The build is stuck in Build In Progress > >>> * No notification is triggered (an error has occured?!) > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Stéphane > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > 1.1-alpha-2 -> higher importance issues and ones generally > >>> related to xml-rpc > >>> > 1.1-alpha-# -> issues that probably ought to be resolved in the > >>> alpha releases > >>> > Future -> stuff that probably ain't going to get done any day soon > >>> > > >>> > the idea being that we can make new sequential release issues > >>> off of > >>> > the 1.1-alpha-# release tag until we are done with alpha > >>> releases. I > >>> > think once 1.1-alpha-1 is released then we can go through 1.1- > >>> alpha-2 > >>> > and decide what should be done, make a new release called 1.1- > >>> alpha-3 > >>> > and bulk move issues that aren't going to be addressed then (like > >>> > maybe all the xml-rpc issues) > >>> > > >>> > I think we shouldn't worry about making these actually releases > >>> cut > >>> > with the maven-release-plugin. I say we just make a build and > >>> get it > >>> > available for download. Also tag the continuum trunk accordingly. > >>> > Then we ought to try to release a new alpha every few weeks > >>> until we > >>> > have the alpha-# issues converging towards 0. > >>> > > >>> > When we actually get to beta/rc releases then we can cut actual > >>> releases. > >>> > > >>> > Now about my allocation of issues, its not gospel! If you > >>> disagree > >>> > with any of my assigning of fix versions then just fix it yourself > >>> > (the version, or better yet the bug). > >>> > > >>> > At the time of this writing I have the 1.1-alpha-1 release down > >>> to a > >>> > modest 8 issues with a few of those questionable and/or waiting > >>> for a > >>> > bit of feedback. I have yet to go through the 200 or so unfiled > >>> > issues though so that might go up a bit, I'll do that now. > >>> > > >>> > thoughts? > >>> > jesse > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > On 3/7/07, Emmanuel Venisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > > We don't need it the migration tool now. We'll can see to it > >>> when we'll release a first beta on rc. > >>> > > > >>> > > Emmanuel > >>> > > > >>> > > Brett Porter a écrit : > >>> > > > > >>> > > > On 07/03/2007, at 9:52 AM, Jesse McConnell wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > >> Ok, well the little poll thread I made seemed to be > >>> strongly in favor > >>> > > >> of getting things pulled together to start getting alpha > >>> releases out > >>> > > >> of continuum. So with that in mind here is a list of a > >>> few things > >>> > > >> that we need to get in order for an alpha release that I > >>> shamelessly > >>> > > >> started base on bretts comments > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> - properly mark up the model as it was for 1.0.3 release > >>> > > >> - add methods to continuum-data-management to utilise that > >>> and then > >>> > > >> make any necessary transformations (c-d-m will do the > >>> basic 1-to-1 > >>> > > >> conversions) > >>> > > >> - probably write a little CLI to fire it off. > >>> > > >> - vet jira for a 1.1 alpha 1 release version and maybe > >>> schedule out a > >>> > > >> couple of alpha-# releases. > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> I think I'll start in on the data management bit now since > >>> that seems > >>> > > >> like the biggest hurdle. I am not convinced we really > >>> need to worry > >>> > > >> about a continuum 1.0.3 -> continuum 1.1 migration > >>> ability...its not a > >>> > > >> difficult thing to get projects loaded back up into > >>> continuum...but > >>> > > >> we'll see I guess. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > It is a pain, but having said that we could potentially add > >>> it in a > >>> > > > later milestone. I wouldn't want a final version without it. > >>> > > > > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> anyone have anything to add? > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> jesse > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> --jesse mcconnell > >>> > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > -- > >>> > jesse mcconnell > >>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > > >>> > >
