Just looking at the stack trace in DERBY-854 it has the feel of the system trying to do the automatic upgrade between point releases of stored procedures on a read only db. It is a total guess at what it going on. Note all I did was read the stack trace in the 854 and happened to remember the description of the bug you fixed - not even sure which bug it was at this point.
Satheesh Bandaram wrote: > Mike, I missed your question... which was in the subject. The issue I > fixed is different... It was about soft upgrade failing on readonly > database. > > Satheesh > > Mike Matrigali wrote: > > >>Alex Miller wrote: >> >> >>>I think DERBY-854 (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-854) is >>>critical for working with read-only databases in embedded mode. >>>Currently, the JDBC DatabaseMetaData methods are completely broken when >>>running in this mode. Thus, read-only databases cannot work with any >>>tool that imports metadata (which includes most JDBC tools I'm aware >>>of). >>>Please vote for this bug if you would like to use read-only databases >>>from a zip file. My company would love to ship some example databases >>>in this way but have given up on Derby due to this bug. >>>Alex Miller >>>Chief Architect >>>MetaMatrix >>> >>> >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: Rick Hillegas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, >>>February 14, 2006 12:13 PM >>>To: Derby Discussion; Derby Development >>>Subject: upcoming 10.2 release >>> >>>Dear Derby user community, >>> >>>Yesterday, the Derby developers started a discussion about the timing >>>and contents of the next (10.2) release. A feature freeze date of April >>>7 was suggested although we have not settled on this date yet. I would >>>estimate that the actual release would appear around two months after >>>feature freeze. >>> >>>Please let us know about any bugs which are particularly important to >>>you and which you would like to see fixed in this release. >>> >>>Thanks, >>>-Rick >>> >>> >> >> >> > >
