sha512 hashes for all
> the old files since md5 and sha1 are frowned upon anyway these days.
The existing hashes are sha256 - no point replacing these with sha512.
> Gary
>
>
> >
> > On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 at 17:02, sebb wrote:
> > >
> > > There's an issue with
ese days.
>
Done.
Gary
>
> Gary
>
>
>>
>> On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 at 17:02, sebb wrote:
>> >
>> > There's an issue with https://commons.apache.org/dbcp/, at least when
>> > viewed from the UK - it has not been updated to 2.8.0.
>> > I've
hat file is either misconfigured for not
flexible enough.
The simplest solution would be to manually generate sha512 hashes for all
the old files since md5 and sha1 are frowned upon anyway these days.
Gary
>
> On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 at 17:02, sebb wrote:
> >
> > There's an issue
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:52 PM sebb wrote:
> I think I have fixed the hash links.
>
Thank you for fixing that. This won't happen for Pool2 since all of the
relevant old files already have sha512 hashes. This is not the case for
DBCP, so it would be nice to generate sha512 hashes for the
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:02 PM sebb wrote:
> There's an issue with https://commons.apache.org/dbcp/, at least when
> viewed from the UK - it has not been updated to 2.8.0.
> I've reported this as INFRA-20898
>
I had to hit CTRL-F5 (Control Refresh) in Chrome to force it to relo
I think I have fixed the hash links.
The download_dbcp.xml file did not agree with the POM.
There must have been an error in the release generation process which
should be looked at.
On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 at 17:02, sebb wrote:
>
> There's an issue with https://commons.apache.org/dbcp/, at
There's an issue with https://commons.apache.org/dbcp/, at least when
viewed from the UK - it has not been updated to 2.8.0.
I've reported this as INFRA-20898
There's also an issue with the new page, e.g.
http://commons.us.apache.org/proper/commons-dbcp/download_dbcp.cgi
The hash links
The Apache Commons DBCP team is pleased to announce the release of Apache
Apache Commons DBCP 2.8.0.
Apache Commons DBCP software implements Database Connection Pooling.
This is a minor release, including bug fixes and enhancements.
Changes in this version include:
New features:
o DBCP-564
; OS name: "linux", version: "4.15.0-118-generic", arch: "amd64", family:
> "unix"
>
>
> Cheers
> Bruno
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, 22 September 2020, 7:34:50 am NZST, Gary Gregory <
> ggreg...@apache.org> wrote:
>
&g
My +1
Gary
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:34 PM Gary Gregory wrote:
> We have fixed a few bugs and added some enhancements since Apache Commons
> DBCP 2.7.0 was released, so I would like to release Apache Commons DBCP
> 2.8.0.
>
> Apache Commons DBCP 2.8.0 RC1 is available
d a few bugs and added some enhancements since Apache Commons
DBCP 2.7.0 was released, so I would like to release Apache Commons DBCP
2.8.0.
Apache Commons DBCP 2.8.0 RC1 is available for review here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/dbcp/2.8.0-RC1 (svn
revision 41530)
T
mpki staff 1167 Sep 24 10:10 downloader.sh
> -rwxr-xr-x@ 1 chtompki staff 1511 Sep 24 10:14 validator.sh
>
> Where downloader.sh =
> https://github.com/chtompki/notes/blob/master/commons-release-validation/commons-dbcp-2.8.0-RC1-downloader.sh
> <
> https://gith
commons-dbcp2-2.8.0-src.zip.sha512
-rwxr-xr-x@ 1 chtompki staff 1167 Sep 24 10:10 downloader.sh
-rwxr-xr-x@ 1 chtompki staff 1511 Sep 24 10:14 validator.sh
Where downloader.sh =
https://github.com/chtompki/notes/blob/master/commons-release-validation/commons-dbcp-2.8.0-RC1-downloader.sh
ping ;-)
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:34 PM Gary Gregory wrote:
> We have fixed a few bugs and added some enhancements since Apache Commons
> DBCP 2.7.0 was released, so I would like to release Apache Commons DBCP
> 2.8.0.
>
> Apache Commons DBCP 2.8.0 RC1 is available for review he
ependency, which I am sure would cause CI to
> fail.
>
OK, sounds good, I'll push out a [pool] RC later this week after the [dbcp]
RC.
Gary
>
> Phil
>
> >
> > Gary
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 8:30 PM Phil Steitz
> wrote:
> >
> >> On 9/
on to DBCP.
I am still working on testing this in the DBCP use case. Probably best
to wait a little for others to review and for me to get the DBCP change
tested against current pool sources. I should be able to finish that
this weekend.
I implemented changes in DBCP, based on recently committed changes
Gregory wrote:
> >>> This feature is now in Pool master. I will prepare an RC soon if you
> >>> all think we are good to go so we can then move on to DBCP.
> >> I am still working on testing this in the DBCP use case. Probably best
> >> to wait a little
RC soon if you
>>>> all think we are good to go so we can then move on to DBCP.
>>> I am still working on testing this in the DBCP use case. Probably best
>>> to wait a little for others to review and for me to get the DBCP change
>>> tested against curr
On 9/14/20 10:10 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 1:07 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
On 9/14/20 9:36 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
This feature is now in Pool master. I will prepare an RC soon if you
all think we are good to go so we can then move on to DBCP.
I am still working
Sounds good. I implemented the DBCP changes this weekend but did not
finish testing and I had to make some decisions that would be good to
talk about. I will ask about that in another thread. I think the pool
changes are fine though and will meet the need.
On 9/21/20 7:55 AM, Gary Gregory
We have fixed a few bugs and added some enhancements since Apache Commons
DBCP 2.7.0 was released, so I would like to release Apache Commons DBCP
2.8.0.
Apache Commons DBCP 2.8.0 RC1 is available for review here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/dbcp/2.8.0-RC1 (svn
revision
e new DestroyMode work Phil did in Pool for use in DBCP in
> a subsequent release.
>
Note that the pool work has not been released yet anyway but it is in Pool
master.
Gary
>
> Gary
>
>
Hi All:
I need to pick up the fix "Mask out user name and password from
DriverAdapterCPDS.toString()." ASAP, so I plan on creating a release
candidate later today or tonight.
I can pick up the new DestroyMode work Phil did in Pool for use in DBCP in
a subsequent release.
Gary
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 1:07 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
>
>
> On 9/14/20 9:36 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > This feature is now in Pool master. I will prepare an RC soon if you
> > all think we are good to go so we can then move on to DBCP.
>
> I am still working on testin
On 9/14/20 9:36 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
This feature is now in Pool master. I will prepare an RC soon if you
all think we are good to go so we can then move on to DBCP.
I am still working on testing this in the DBCP use case. Probably best
to wait a little for others to review and for me
This feature is now in Pool master. I will prepare an RC soon if you
all think we are good to go so we can then move on to DBCP.
Gary
On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 9:16 AM Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> FWIW, I like the name "DestroyMode" because it matches the "destroy" in th
; > > On 31/08/2020 01:05, Phil Steitz wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> If others agree it is a good idea for dbcp, I can do it. I can see
> the
> > >> argument that its better to stay with close() even for abandoned and I
> > >&
On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 6:02 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
>
>
> On 9/3/20 2:44 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 31/08/2020 01:05, Phil Steitz wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> If others agree it is a good idea for dbcp, I can do it. I can see the
> >> argument that
On 9/3/20 2:44 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 31/08/2020 01:05, Phil Steitz wrote:
If others agree it is a good idea for dbcp, I can do it. I can see the
argument that its better to stay with close() even for abandoned and I
have not been able to get the deadlock to happen, so I would like
problematic)
Gruss
Bernd
--
http://bernd.eckenfels.net
Von: Phil Steitz
Gesendet: Friday, September 4, 2020 1:06:23 AM
An: dev@commons.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [dbcp][pool] Use abort instead of close for abandoned connections?
On 9/3/20 3:02 PM, Bernd Eckenfels wrote
ion scenarios. IIUC the contract correctly, at
least the pool thread will not be blocked in these scenarios if we move
to this for that use case. Note that dbcp/pool can be configured to
remove abandoned connections on borrow as well as maintenance, so
blocking in the former case blocks the pool cli
v@commons.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [dbcp][pool] Use abort instead of close for abandoned connections?
On 31/08/2020 01:05, Phil Steitz wrote:
> If others agree it is a good idea for dbcp, I can do it. I can see the
> argument that its better to stay with close() even for abandoned and I
&
On 31/08/2020 01:05, Phil Steitz wrote:
> If others agree it is a good idea for dbcp, I can do it. I can see the
> argument that its better to stay with close() even for abandoned and I
> have not been able to get the deadlock to happen, so I would like to
> wait a bit and
start with the simplest but then add more granularity
as needed.
Phil,
Do you plan on providing this feature? I'm a bit busy with other components
and work ATM (aren't we all!)
If others agree it is a good idea for dbcp, I can do it. I can see the
argument that its better to stay with close
> >>> On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 2:41 PM Phil Steitz
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 8/29/20 11:03 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 1:35 PM Phil Steitz
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>&g
://Bernd.eckenfels.net
Von: Phil Steitz
Gesendet: Sunday, August 30, 2020 8:27:04 PM
An: dev@commons.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [dbcp][pool] Use abort instead of close for abandoned connections?
On 8/29/20 9:58 PM, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> We have a pool implementation where
was using a different pool, but it looks to me like the same
deadlock could happen with dbcp. The source is arguably a driver bug,
but in [2], the driver maintainer makes the good point that to avoid
the
problem in [1] (and others like it) it would be better if pool
maintainers used abort
An: Commons Developers List
Betreff: Re: [dbcp][pool] Use abort instead of close for abandoned connections?
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 2:41 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
On 8/29/20 11:03 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 1:35 PM Phil Steitz
wrote:
A pool-related deadlock was reported
Gregory wrote:
>>> > On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 1:35 PM Phil Steitz
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> A pool-related deadlock was reported recently in [1] to tomcat-user.
>>> >> The OP was using a different pool, but it looks to me like the same
>>> &g
n 8/29/20 11:03 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> > On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 1:35 PM Phil Steitz
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> A pool-related deadlock was reported recently in [1] to tomcat-user.
>> >> The OP was using a different pool, but it looks to me like the s
but that also can be blocked
before the abort)
Gruss
Bernd
--
https://Bernd.eckenfels.net
Von: Gary Gregory
Gesendet: Saturday, August 29, 2020 10:02:42 PM
An: Commons Developers List
Betreff: Re: [dbcp][pool] Use abort instead of close for abandoned connections?
On Sat
different pool, but it looks to me like the same
> >> deadlock could happen with dbcp. The source is arguably a driver bug,
> >> but in [2], the driver maintainer makes the good point that to avoid the
> >> problem in [1] (and others like it) it would be better if pool
On 8/29/20 11:03 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 1:35 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
A pool-related deadlock was reported recently in [1] to tomcat-user.
The OP was using a different pool, but it looks to me like the same
deadlock could happen with dbcp. The source is arguably
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 1:35 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
> A pool-related deadlock was reported recently in [1] to tomcat-user.
> The OP was using a different pool, but it looks to me like the same
> deadlock could happen with dbcp. The source is arguably a driver bug,
> but in [2]
A pool-related deadlock was reported recently in [1] to tomcat-user.
The OP was using a different pool, but it looks to me like the same
deadlock could happen with dbcp. The source is arguably a driver bug,
but in [2], the driver maintainer makes the good point that to avoid the
problem
ng about this some more, the quick exit above will handle the
DBCP statement pool case, but the problem could also happen with
non-null evictors. So the code probably needs to be modified to live
up to the commitment in the EvictionTimer class javadoc (that it keeps
track of its client pools and shuts d
ning and it is in
> >> process of running a task when the test above is performed, the queue
> >> may show as empty because it has taken the queued task, is executing
> >> it and only re-queues afterward. That could cause the main executor
> >> to be shut down.
&g
me think it is
> >> possible that if there is just one other evictor running and it is in
> >> process of running a task when the test above is performed, the queue
> >> may show as empty because it has taken the queued task, is executing
> >> it and onl
ther one open and close a bunch of others with
evictors disabled concurrently. If this turns out to be correct, a
simple fix would be to just exit immediately if evictor is null (a
null evictor can't be the last one).
Thinking about this some more, the quick exit above will handle the
DBCP s
f others with
evictors disabled concurrently. If this turns out to be correct, a
simple fix would be to just exit immediately if evictor is null (a
null evictor can't be the last one).
Thinking about this some more, the quick exit above will handle the DBCP
statement pool case, but the problem co
On 7/5/20 11:07 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
The test looks a little off to me. I am not sure I fully understand
what it is trying to do, but I suspect that the reason that it fails
sporadically (I have seen this myself) is that to succeed it needs to
run two evictor cycles when it is set to
The test looks a little off to me. I am not sure I fully understand
what it is trying to do, but I suspect that the reason that it fails
sporadically (I have seen this myself) is that to succeed it needs to
run two evictor cycles when it is set to wait for only one. I may be
wrong as I don't
This must be some timing issue as the test passed on GitHub and Travis,
but, I do see one failure for that on Java 11 on GitHub.
I am guessing the test might need to be set up differently.
Gary
On Fri, Jul 3, 2020, 14:35 Robert Paschek
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> when I'm running mvn clean test on
Hello,
when I'm running mvn clean test on the current master branch, testEvict always
fails with the same error.
[ERROR] Failures:
[ERROR] TestAbandonedBasicDataSource>TestBasicDataSource.testEvict:946
EvictionTimer thread was destroyed with numIdle=7(expected: less or equal than
5)
to look into this.
>>
>> Can you think of a better propertyname than
>> limitPreparedStatementPoolToConnectionUse? While the meaning is clear (at
>> least to me), it's also quite long.
>>
>> Robert
>>
>>
>> From: Phil Steitz
>> Sent: Dienstag, 30. Juni 2020
so quite long.
>
> Robert
>
>
> From: Phil Steitz
> Sent: Dienstag, 30. Juni 2020 21:07
> To: dev@commons.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DBCP] poolPreparedStatements
>
>
> On 6/29/20 12:17 PM, Robert Paschek wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > DBCP
to
use.
Robert
From: Gary Gregory
Sent: Montag, 29. Juni 2020 23:37
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [DBCP] poolPreparedStatements
You can do this today by using two connection pools, one configured with
statement pooling, and the other not (which is the default).
Gary
On Mon, Jun 29
@commons.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DBCP] poolPreparedStatements
On 6/29/20 12:17 PM, Robert Paschek wrote:
> Hello,
>
> DBCP has a feature to pool PreparedStatements for the lifetime of a
> connection.
> This results in cursors being open and locks in the database for a long
On 6/29/20 12:17 PM, Robert Paschek wrote:
Hello,
DBCP has a feature to pool PreparedStatements for the lifetime of a connection.
This results in cursors being open and locks in the database for a long time,
which could cause problems with administrative tasks in the database. That why
I
You can do this today by using two connection pools, one configured with
statement pooling, and the other not (which is the default).
Gary
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020, 16:36 Robert Paschek
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> DBCP has a feature to pool PreparedStatements for the lifetime of a
>
Hello,
DBCP has a feature to pool PreparedStatements for the lifetime of a connection.
This results in cursors being open and locks in the database for a long time,
which could cause problems with administrative tasks in the database. That why
I would prefer this pool to be more short-living
respectfully disagree with the
position that pool performance does not matter because other sources of
latency swamp it. For heavily loaded apps, infrastructure performance
matters. We spent a lot of time making DBCP 2 a high-performance pool
and it would be a shame to take backward steps now
PM Phil Steitz wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 8/29/19 6:37 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > > Hi All:
> > >
> > > In https://github.com/apache/commons-dbcp/pull/34, I've reduced a ton
> of
> > > boilerplate code using lambdas. This also happens to
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 6:17 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
>
>
> On 8/29/19 6:37 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > Hi All:
> >
> > In https://github.com/apache/commons-dbcp/pull/34, I've reduced a ton of
> > boilerplate code using lambdas. This also happens to fix a bunch of
&
On 8/29/19 6:37 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
Hi All:
In https://github.com/apache/commons-dbcp/pull/34, I've reduced a ton of
boilerplate code using lambdas. This also happens to fix a bunch of places
where we did not call checkOpen() when we should have.
Interesting. I have a couple
Hi All:
In https://github.com/apache/commons-dbcp/pull/34, I've reduced a ton of
boilerplate code using lambdas. This also happens to fix a bunch of places
where we did not call checkOpen() when we should have.
Gary
The Apache Commons DBCP team is pleased to announce the release of Apache
Apache Commons DBCP 2.7.0.
Apache Commons DBCP software implements Database Connection Pooling.
This is a minor release, including bug fixes and enhancements.
Changes in this version include:
New features:
o DBCP-539
August 2019, 1:42:45 am NZST, Gary Gregory <
> garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> We have fixed quite a few bugs and added some significant enhancements
> since Apache Commons DBCP 2.6.0 was released, so I would like to release
> Apache Commons DBCP 2.7.0.
>
> Apache C
My +1
Gary
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 9:42 AM Gary Gregory wrote:
> We have fixed quite a few bugs and added some significant enhancements
> since Apache Commons DBCP 2.6.0 was released, so I would like to release
> Apache Commons DBCP 2.7.0.
>
> Apache Commons DBCP 2.7.0 R
NZST, Gary Gregory
wrote:
We have fixed quite a few bugs and added some significant enhancements
since Apache Commons DBCP 2.6.0 was released, so I would like to release
Apache Commons DBCP 2.7.0.
Apache Commons DBCP 2.7.0 RC1 is available for review here:
https://dist.apache.org/re
2019, at 9:42 AM, Gary Gregory
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > We have fixed quite a few bugs and added some significant enhancements
>>> > since Apache Commons DBCP 2.6.0 was released, so I would like to
>>> release
>>> > Apache Commons DBCP 2.7
se?
>
Ping to PMC members.
Gary
>
> Gary
>
>
>>
>> > On Jul 31, 2019, at 9:42 AM, Gary Gregory
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > We have fixed quite a few bugs and added some significant enhancements
>> > since Apache Commons DBCP 2.6.0 was re
gt;
> > We have fixed quite a few bugs and added some significant enhancements
> > since Apache Commons DBCP 2.6.0 was released, so I would like to release
> > Apache Commons DBCP 2.7.0.
> >
> > Apache Commons DBCP 2.7.0 RC1 is available for review here:
> >htt
+1 all looks good to me. Nit. the site build for java11 didn’t work, but all
the tests passed.
> On Jul 31, 2019, at 9:42 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> We have fixed quite a few bugs and added some significant enhancements
> since Apache Commons DBCP 2.6.0 was released, so
We have fixed quite a few bugs and added some significant enhancements
since Apache Commons DBCP 2.6.0 was released, so I would like to release
Apache Commons DBCP 2.7.0.
Apache Commons DBCP 2.7.0 RC1 is available for review here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/dbcp/2.7.0-RC1
"ERROR: Maven Home /home/jenkins/tools/maven/latest3 doesnt exist
That seems fundamentally broken. Any ideas?
Gary
-- Forwarded message -
From: Apache Jenkins Server
Date: Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 5:43 PM
Subject: Build failed in Jenkins: commons-dbcp #383
To:
See &l
Hi All,
I think we should
make org.apache.commons.dbcp2.Utils.DISCONNECTION_SQL_CODES an immutable
set instead of a mutable set.
Thoughts?
Gary
RCs
for [pool] and then [dbcp]. I expect to do [pool] ASAP.
Gary
Hi All,
I know we have some clean up work to do in [csv], but I plan on cutting RCs
for [pool] and then [dbcp]. I expect to do [pool] ASAP.
Gary
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 9:44 AM Matt Sicker wrote:
> Thanks, Mark! I’m in complete agreement on your formatting philosophy here
> (consistency over bikeshedding). And also kinda like the new line after
> operator, too, though no strong opinion there since I seem to forget which
> style I prefer
Thanks, Mark! I’m in complete agreement on your formatting philosophy here
(consistency over bikeshedding). And also kinda like the new line after
operator, too, though no strong opinion there since I seem to forget which
style I prefer sometimes.
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 04:21, Mark Thomas
On 10/07/2019 22:47, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:52 AM Mark Thomas wrote:
>
>> On 10/07/2019 15:49, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>
>>> Without arguing about the merits of one kind of formatting vs. another...
>>> If you can configure the Eclipse formatter to do that, I'd consider
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:52 AM Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 10/07/2019 15:49, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> > Without arguing about the merits of one kind of formatting vs. another...
> > If you can configure the Eclipse formatter to do that, I'd consider it,
> > otherwise, I'm not into what I'd call
On 10/07/2019 15:49, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Without arguing about the merits of one kind of formatting vs. another...
> If you can configure the Eclipse formatter to do that, I'd consider it,
> otherwise, I'm not into what I'd call "artisanal formatting" ;-)
The Eclipse setting you want is:
m the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
> >>>
> >>> ggregory pushed a commit to branch master
> >>> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/commons-dbcp.git
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The following commit(s) were added to r
o branch master
>>> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/commons-dbcp.git
>>>
>>>
>>> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
>>> new 8a579d3 [DBCP-547] Add a ConnectionFactory class name setting
/repos/asf/commons-dbcp.git
> >
> >
> > The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
> > new 8a579d3 [DBCP-547] Add a ConnectionFactory class name setting
> for BasicDataSource.createConnectionFactory() #33.
> > 8a579d3 is described b
to refs/heads/master by this push:
> new 8a579d3 [DBCP-547] Add a ConnectionFactory class name setting for
> BasicDataSource.createConnectionFactory() #33.
> 8a579d3 is described below
>
> commit 8a579d304595853012ccf8c2bc93022c383a35bb
> Author: Gary Gregory
>
Mark,
Would you please create a jira and changes.xml entry so our users know
about this fix?
Thank you,
Gary
On Fri, May 3, 2019, 12:49 wrote:
> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
>
> markt pushed a commit to branch master
> in repository
dmin@localhost:41154/repository/default/read-tests/dir1"
expected:<7> but was:<6>
Thanks again,
Woonsan
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 8:01 AM Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> Hi All:
>
> I think I want to create RCs soon for [pool], [dbcp], and [vfs].
>
> Get your changes an
Hi All:
I think I want to create RCs soon for [pool], [dbcp], and [vfs].
Get your changes and PRs in ;-)
Gary
It looks like not closing a pool negatively affected the test.
Gary
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 12:22 PM Zheng Feng wrote:
> The https://travis-ci.org/apache/commons-dbcp looks good to me. How did
> this exception happen ?
>
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 11:49 PM Gary Gregory
> wrote:
&g
The https://travis-ci.org/apache/commons-dbcp looks good to me. How did
this exception happen ?
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 11:49 PM Gary Gregory wrote:
> Thanks! Now this is failing :-(
>
> java.sql.SQLException: Unable to enlist connection because the transaction
> has been garba
ance(
> -InvocationHandler.class.getClassLoader(),
> + TestSynchronizationOrder.class.getClassLoader(),
> new Class[]{XADataSource.class}, handle);
> bmds.setXaDataSourceInstance(xads);
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 9:28
Fixed in git master.
Gary
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 11:43 AM Gary Gregory wrote:
> Tracking here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DBCP-542
>
> Gary
>
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 11:41 AM Gary Gregory
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks! Now this is failing :-(
>>
>>
Tracking here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DBCP-542
Gary
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 11:41 AM Gary Gregory wrote:
> Thanks! Now this is failing :-(
>
> java.sql.SQLException: Unable to enlist connection because the transaction
> has been garbage collected
> at
> org.ap
:
> Hi All:
>
> I need help getting DBCP to pass its tests on Java 11.
>
> org.apache.commons.dbcp2.managed.TestSynchronizationOrder currently fails
> with:
>
> java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: javax.sql.XADataSource referenced from
> a method is not visible from clas
Hi All:
I need help getting DBCP to pass its tests on Java 11.
org.apache.commons.dbcp2.managed.TestSynchronizationOrder currently fails
with:
java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: javax.sql.XADataSource referenced from
a method is not visible from class loader
at
java.base
nits checkstyle, pmd, cpd.
>
> Quite happy that our test coverage is improving as well.
>
>
> > On Feb 15, 2019, at 11:01 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >
> > We have fixed quite a few bugs and added some significant enhancements
> > since Apache Commons DBCP
and added some significant enhancements
> since Apache Commons DBCP 2.5.0 was released, so I would like to release
> Apache Commons DBCP 2.6.0.
>
> Apache Commons DBCP 2.6.0 RC1 is available for review here:
>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/dbcp/2.6.0-R
101 - 200 of 1661 matches
Mail list logo
