Sunitha Kambhampati wrote:
> Although I havent looked at the diffs yet, but I applied the patch in
> Derby-243 to see how the derby.log would look with
> derby.language.logStatementText=true
>
> I notice now the output is a little hard to read with all the numbers
> and letters to look at, but I guess thats OK since thats what we
> decided on.
>
Well we should do the right thing. I was willing to concede to UUID's
but I really don't have to look at those logs all the time.
I really hate to bring this up now, but after thinking about the error
stream stuff and reviewing Dag's new test I have some new thoughts on
this issue myself and these are as follows.
* The switch to UUID's was to guarantee uniqueness in the case
where we have multiple
class loaders running multiple Derby systems in the same jvm.
* If you do have multiple Derby systems in the same JVM, you need
to use the
derby.stream.error.* properties to get your error log output
separated.
(the default derby.log will just get clobbered by the multiple
systems.)
* If we stick with integers I think we get a unique id in each
stream so have clear separation of connection id's.
David can you convince me again that we need UUID's? Sorry to bring
this all up again #:(
Kathey
