[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-216?page=comments#action_12429314 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-216:
-
The insert case is included in largeCodeGen now.
expand largeCodeGen.java test
Kathey,
I ran the lang/largeCodeGen.java with PRINT_FAILURE_EXCEPTIONset to true as follows:
java -Dverbose=true -Djvmflags=-mx512M -ms512M -Dframework=DerbyNetClientorg.apache.derbyTesting.functionTests.harness.RunTest lang/largeCodeGen.java
and got the following
MasterFileName =
Kathey, please ignore previous stack trace. I am writing it here again:-
MasterFileName = master/largeCodeGen.out15a16,18 java.sql.SQLException: Statement too complex. Try rewriting the query to remove complexity. Eliminating many duplicate expressions or breaking up the query and
storing interim
Attaching files.
Thanks, Raman
largeCodeGen.out
Description: Binary data
PASS: PREPARE: Logical operators with 200 parameters
PASS: Logical operators with 200 parameters
PASS: PREPARE: Logical operators with 300 parameters
PASS: Logical operators with 300 parameters
PASS: PREPARE: Logical
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-216?page=comments#action_12378154 ]
Sunitha Kambhampati commented on DERBY-216:
---
I remember the last time I ran the largeData with ibm142 a couple months ago,
this suite passed OK. Now, I ran the
Sunitha Kambhampati (JIRA) wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-216?page=comments#action_12378154 ]
Sunitha Kambhampati commented on DERBY-216:
---
I remember the last time I ran the largeData with ibm142 a couple months ago, this
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-216?page=comments#action_12378176 ]
Kathey Marsden commented on DERBY-216:
--
With revision 37644 I fixed the run to run differences and at that time the
test passed with both embedded and client on Windows.
I haven't followed the largeCodeGen test much, does it take an extremely
long time or need a lot of memory? I am not sure what amount of time is
the cutover from not being appropriate in the nightly suite. Otherwise
we should just have add it somewhere else.
I have run the large data test
Mike Matrigali wrote:
I haven't followed the largeCodeGen test much, does it take an extremely
long time or need a lot of memory? I am not sure what amount of time is
the cutover from not being appropriate in the nightly suite. Otherwise
we should just have add it somewhere else.
I have run
Mike Matrigali wrote:
I haven't followed the largeCodeGen test much, does it take an extremely
long time or need a lot of memory? I am not sure what amount of time is
the cutover from not being appropriate in the nightly suite. Otherwise
we should just have add it somewhere else.
It drags
Mike Matrigali wrote:
I haven't followed the largeCodeGen test much, does it take an extremely
long time or need a lot of memory? I am not sure what amount of time is
the cutover from not being appropriate in the nightly suite.
largeCodeGen takes about 5 minutes on my laptop, but I have heard
ok, looks like it belongs in that suite. I just wanted to make sure
putting stuff in this suite is the exception. Even with this test it
sounds like it would be nice if the 1st part was a standard test and
the problem query was in this suite.
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
Mike Matrigali wrote:
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-216?page=comments#action_12364516 ]
Kathey Marsden commented on DERBY-216:
--
I pulled the largeCodeGen test into the largeData suite. I suppressed the
exception output for failed cases by default. It varies
13 matches
Mail list logo
