Kathey Marsden wrote:
John Embretsen wrote:
Although I would like to know more about why some of the junit suites
require extra memory, I think it would save developers lots of hassle
in the mean while if we check in this change.
It may be related to DERBY-2344, statements staying in the cache even
after the table on which they depend is dropped.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2344
Thanks! I knew someone was looking into it a while ago, but didn't remember
which Jira it was... Good to know that a possible cause has been identified.
--
John
