David W. Van Couvering wrote:
Thanks for catching this, Kristian. As I go through messages on the
client, I try to find a matching message that already exists for the
embedded code. I have not tried to actually look at the "same" code
on the embedded side, as it's really hard to tell what the "same" code
is, and where it is.
I think the message "Invalid transaction state" is very vague, and in
this way is very general and reusable. I have heard Dan state that
general and reusable is better than specific and not reusable. I am
personally having trouble knowing how to best balance a comprehensible
message with one that is too specific.
In this case, however, I think "Invalid transaction state" is so vague
as to be pretty much unhelpful. I would vote that we migrate
CANNOT_CLOSE_ACTIVE_XA_CONNECTION from a client-specific message in
client/.../loc/clientmessages_en.properties to a reusable message in
engine/.../loc/messages_en.properties.
I also think that the standard SQL State of 25000 is incorrectly used,
here. This isn't an invalid transaction state. It's an attempt to
close a connection with an open transaction. If anything it *might*
be a connection exception (08000), but I actually think it doesn't
apply to either of these, and probably the SQL State, once you migrate
it, should start with "XJ" - JDBC exceptions.
I'm a bit confused. The SQL spec (2003) seem to think that closing a
connection with an active transaction is to be considered an invalid
transaction state.
INVALID_TRANSACTION_STATE_NO_SUBCLASS = "25000".
INVALID_TRANSACTION_STATE_ACTIVE_SQL_TRANSACTION = "25001".
There are more subclasses (see for instance p 776 of the second volume).
Also, under "17.3 <disconnect statement>", general rule 6:
"6) If any SQL-connection in L is active, then an exception condition is
raised: invalid transaction state —
active SQL-transaction."
(L is a list of SQL-connections - see general rule 5)
Sorry for not bringing this up earlier, but I've been sick and the
required karma to consult the SQL standard was not restored until today.
JDBC does not have much to say on the issue, from Connection.close():
"It is strongly recommended that an application explicitly commits or
rolls back an active transaction prior to calling the close method. If
the close method is called and there is an active transaction, the
results are implementation-defined."
The reason I react on the currently proposed solution, is the use of an
XA related SQLState. Can anyone explain to me why we want use that when
calling close on a "normal" SQL connection with an uncommitted
transaction on it?
And is the SQL standard (2003) the authoritative source on this issue?
I do agree with David that the generic "invalid transaction state" is a
bit vague, but since we have several subclasses (including one for this
specific case), we can elaborate on it if that is the correct way to go.
thanks,
--
Kristian
I am also realizing that we as a community need to decide if we want
to ensure that the network client and the engine should always have
the same SQL States for the same exceptions. It's laudable, and if we
catch differences I think we should fix them, but I am not sure if it
should be *required*, especially for existing code. It is *very* hard
to reliably backport this consistency into existing code, as the code
paths on the two drivers are quite different. If anyone has any ideas
about this, it would be much appreciated.
David
P.S. I'll start running the jdbc40 test suite as well as derbyall
prior to checkin of i18n changes.
Kristian Waagan (JIRA) wrote:
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1149?page=comments#action_12371754
]
Kristian Waagan commented on DERBY-1149:
----------------------------------------
I need a little help on my issue. The following diff is from r388309:
---
/db/derby/code/trunk/java/client/org/apache/derby/client/am/Connection.java
2006/03/24 00:54:27 388308
+++
db/derby/code/trunk/java/client/org/apache/derby/client/am/Connection.java
2006/03/24 00:55:44 388309
[snip]
// The following precondition matches CLI semantics, see
SQLDisconnect()
if (!autoCommit_ && inUnitOfWork_ && !allowCloseInUOW_()) {
throw new SqlException(agent_.logWriter_,
- "java.sql.Connection.close() requested while a
transaction is in progress on the connection." +
- "The transaction remains active, and the
connection cannot be closed.");
+ new MessageId
(SQLState.CANNOT_CLOSE_ACTIVE_XA_CONNECTION));
}
[snip]
Is this change correct?
In my test, the SQLState used on the embedded side is
LANG_INVALID_TRANSACTION_STATE (25000):
# Transaction states, matches DB2
25000=Invalid transaction state.
The way I see it, without much knowledge about this, there are multiple
possible outcomes:
1) The change is invalid, and we start using
SQLSTATE.LANG_INVALID_TRANSACTION_STATE on the client as well.
2) The change is correct, and I change the test to reflect this.
3) The change is invalid, and we make
SQLSTATE.LANG_INVALID_TRANSACTION_STATE
more verbose (aka the old message on the client) and start using it
on the
client and update the message text for embedded.
What do you say?
'jdbc40/StatementTest.junit' fails under DerbyNetClient
-------------------------------------------------------
Key: DERBY-1149
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1149
Project: Derby
Type: Test
Components: Regression Test Failure, Test
Versions: 10.2.0.0
Environment: JDK 1.6 (b76 used, believed to apply to all)
Reporter: Kristian Waagan
Assignee: Kristian Waagan
One of the tests in jdbc40/StatementTest.junit fails with the
following message:
"Attempt to shutdown framework: DerbyNetClient
0 add
....F.
There was 1 failure:
1)
testIsClosedWhenClosingConnectionInInvalidState(org.apache.derbyTesting.functionTests.tests.jdbc4.StatementTest)junit.framework.ComparisonFailure:
Unexpected exception thrown: Cannot close a connection while a
global transaction is still active.
expected:<java.sql.Connection.close() requested while a transaction
is in progress on the connection.The transaction remains active,
and the connection cannot be closed...> but was:<Cannot close a
connection while a global transaction is still active...>
FAILURES!!!
Tests run: 5, Failures: 1, Errors: 0
Test Failed.
*** End: StatementTest jdk1.6.0-beta2 DerbyNetClient 2006-03-24
12:53:22 ***"
The reason is that the exception message text has been changed. This
comparison is only done when running DerbyNetClient, because
SQLState was not implemented there.
The checkin that caused the error:
"Author: davidvc
Date: Thu Mar 23 16:55:44 2006
New Revision: 388309
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=388309&view=rev
Log:
DERBY-839 (Partial). Internationalize Connection.java. Also upgraded
the "i18n lint" test to be a little more intelligent, and to not exit
on the first failure.
Passes derbynetclientmats. All changes are client-specific so derbyall
was not run."
A
