Wrong description of IndexName field in public JavaDoc for LockTable
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: DERBY-2592
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2592
Project: Derby
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Javadoc
Affects Versions: 10.3.0.0
Reporter: Olav Sandstaa
Priority: Trivial
The public JavaDoc for LockTable says the following in the description of the
INDEXNAME retrieved from SYSCS_DIAG.LOCK_TABLE:
INDEXNAME varchar(128) - normally null. If non-null, a lock is held on the
index, this can only happen if this is not a user transaction.
I think the last part is wrong. Normal user transactions might also have a
value in the INDEXNAME. For example, here is part of the lock table for three
user transactions:
XID |TYPE |MODE|TABLENAME |LOCKNAME |STATE|TABLETYPE|INDEXNAME
---------------------------------------------------------------------
186 |ROW |X |T2 |(1,9) |GRANT|T |NULL
184 |ROW |S |T2 |(1,9) |WAIT |T |NULL
188 |ROW |X |T1 |(1,11) |GRANT|T |NULL
186 |ROW |S |T1 |(1,11) |WAIT |T |NULL
186 |ROW |S |T1 |(1,1) |GRANT|T |SQL070425023213370
188 |ROW |S |T1 |(1,1) |GRANT|T |SQL070425023213370
184 |ROW |X |T1 |(1,7) |GRANT|T |NULL
188 |ROW |S |T1 |(1,7) |WAIT |T |NULL
Two of the lock entries have an index. I expect this to be the Scan lock that
have been set during traversal of the B-tree.
Proposed fix: remove the last part of the sentence.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
