Rick Hillegas wrote: > Kathey Marsden wrote: > >> David Van Couvering wrote: >> >>> >>> - Log a bug >>> >>> - Work on fixing it by booting on first connection rather than when >>> the driver is loaded. >>> >> It would be good to get input from the user community as well. One >> possible approach would be to log the bug, mark it as a regression, >> existing application impact, and release note needed. and have a >> formal release note. Then send a note to derby-user with a pointer to >> the bug and Ricks summary to see if any users feel there will be >> impact. Unfortunately, my gut instinct is that this is the kind of >> issue that lays dormant and then hits someone hard on upgrade or when >> integrated with another product. It might broadside users >> unaware, like it did the nist tests and DerbyNetAutostart tests. >> It will be really helpful to have the bug and the release note to >> present to users to help them understand impact. >> Then we can close DERBY-930 back up too until it is decided whether >> this "Heisenbug" is a show stopper or not. > > I have logged two new bugs: DERBY-1428 describes the existing, pre-JDBC4 > shape of the problem. DERBY-1429 describes the extra exposure introduced > by JDBC4. I have added a release note to DERBY-930, which summarizes the > problem and its workarounds. In addition, I have asked the user > community to let us know how broad the extra impact is.
Does the "precedence for properties" documentation need to be updated to mention jdbc 4/jdk 1.6 behavior? http://db.apache.org/derby/docs/dev/tuning/ctunsetprop23308.html -jean
