[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3198?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Dyre Tjeldvoll updated DERBY-3198:
----------------------------------
Attachment: derby-3198.v4.diff
Reading Knut's comment again I realized that he was talking about closing
ResultSets and not Statements. I agree that it is no reason not to do this.
Relying on implicit close does not alter the use/freeing of Sections.
The comments also made me want to test what happens when a large number of
Statements are kept open, since Statements with query timeout will hold on to
two Sections (as opposed to only one for Statements without query timeout). So
I added a test case for that.
> Using setQueryTimeout will leak sections
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-3198
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3198
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: JDBC, Network Client
> Affects Versions: 10.3.1.4
> Reporter: Dyre Tjeldvoll
> Assignee: Dyre Tjeldvoll
> Attachments: derby-3198.v1.diff, derby-3198.v2.diff,
> derby-3198.v3.diff, derby-3198.v4.diff, repro.diff
>
>
> The implementation of setQueryTimeout relies on
> NetStatementReply.writeSetSpecialRegister() which will allocate a dynamic
> section when called. No reference to this Section object is kept, and so
> Section.free() never gets called on it. Executing the same statment
> repeatedly with a query timeout set results in the client driver throwing an
> exception because the number of Sections exceeding 32000.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
