Kathey Marsden <[email protected]> writes: > On 12/15/2010 6:20 AM, Knut Anders Hatlen wrote: >> Knut Anders Hatlen<[email protected]> writes: >> >>> Kathey Marsden<[email protected]> writes: >>> >>>> On 12/13/2010 11:58 AM, Rick Hillegas wrote: >>>>> I see that Ole ran this test on 10.5.3 and 10.6.1. Ole no longer >>>>> works on Derby. As you note, no-one has run that test on 10.6.2 or >>>>> 10.7.1. >>>>> >>>> Is there someone that has access to these tests that can run them now >>>> that Ole is gone or is it just one more bit of testing we don't do >>>> anymore? It would be nice to know we are compliant for a release off >>>> trunk. >>> I found the instructions for running these tests and have started >>> them. So if everything goes well, we'll have the results shortly. >> It didn't go all that well... Here's what the report says: >> >> batchUpdate.out: passed: 68 >> callStmt.out: passed: 1,580; failed: 20 >> connection.out: passed: 36 >> dateTime.out: passed: 152 >> dbMeta.out: passed: 940 >> escapeSyntax.out: passed: 324 >> exception.out: passed: 56 >> prepStmt.out: passed: 1,072; failed: 12 >> resultSet.out: passed: 452; failed: 4 >> rsMeta.out: passed: 84 >> stmt.out: passed: 132 >> Total time: 09:58:28 >> >> I haven't looked at all the failures yet. Those I have looked at appear >> to happen because our meta-data now says that we support BOOLEAN, >> whereas the database schema created by the test itself contains >> workarounds for Derby's lack of support for BOOLEAN (like using SMALLINT >> columns instead of BOOLEAN columns). So I think there are some changes >> required for the DDL and DML scripts that create the database schema in >> order to make the test run successfully, but I haven't found anything >> that appears to be a Derby problem yet. >> > Would a workaround to changes the DML scripts for the short run be to > create the database with an old version and run against the soft > upgraded database now that the metadata issue in soft upgrade is > fixed.
That may possibly work. At least it seemed to me that the failures I analyzed wouldn't have happened if getTypeInfo() hadn't returned boolean. -- Knut Anders
