Re: [h2] 1.4.182 corruption

I'm >> afraid this database is not recoverable. >> >> Regards, >> Thomas >> >> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Dieter Cailliau >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> File corrupted while reading record: "/tmp/bms.aut

Re: [h2] 1.4.182 corruption

m afraid > this database is not recoverable. > > Regards, > Thomas > > On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Dieter Cailliau > wrote: >> >> >> File corrupted while reading record: "/tmp/bms.auto.mv.db". Possible >> solution: use the recovery tool [900

[h2] Re: java-level deadlock

The fix is in Version 1.3.174 (2013-10-19). Is it possible to find out in which version the bug was introduced? I have deployments using 1.3.168 and i don't remember having seen this happening. I have seen it happening in 1.3.173 though. I'm wondering whether to upgrade the 1.3.168 deployments

Re: [h2] Unique index or primary key violation: "SYS_ID ON PUBLIC.SYS(ID)" [23505-168] (using 1.3.168)

me queries (those that return many rows) the database itself creates > temporary tables. > > If you still have the database file, could you send it to me please? I > would like to analyze it. > > Regards, > Thomas > > > > On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, Dieter Cailli

Re: [h2] Re: Unique index or primary key violation: "SYS_ID ON PUBLIC.SYS(ID)" [23505-168] (using 1.3.168)

URL: jdbc:h2:/tmp/bms;DB_CLOSE_DELAY=-1;LOCK_TIMEOUT=5000 According to your query, the create_build was 168. I'm not using temporary tables (afaik) just regular JPA (hibernate inside jboss7). I didn't see OutOfMemory in my logs, but they don't go back to the first occurence of the problem, so i

[h2] Re: Unique index or primary key violation: "SYS_ID ON PUBLIC.SYS(ID)" [23505-168] (using 1.3.168)

With 1.3.175 the error message is a bit longer: Unique index or primary key violation: "SYS_ID ON PUBLIC.SYS(ID) VALUES ( /* key:266 */ 15, 0, 3, 'CREATE SEQUENCE PUBLIC.SYSTEM_SEQUENCE_803C1AF8_DCEB_49F0_8A0D_14C8577C

Re: [h2] unable to write: "the database is read only" after system crash

Thanks! That works fine. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "H2 Database" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to h2-database+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to h2-databas

Re: [h2] corrupt database 1.3.168

ually quite easy to analyze and fix. > > Regards, > Thomas > > > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Dieter Cailliau > > > wrote: > >> I assume that that fact (that the h2 version with which i created the >> schema = 1.3.161) is not relevant for the probl

[h2] Re: unable to write: "the database is read only" after system crash

Yes I'm using 2-phase-commit because I use xa-datasource (this is an xml element in jboss' standalone-full-ha.xml), but I never really found out how to configure the thing (jboss as 7.2.0.Final with h2) to perform recovery. I've pasted the config xml below. Note: having recovery is also not 'a

Re: [h2] corrupt database 1.3.168

le, reproducible test case. > > Regards, > Thomas > > > On Tuesday, August 13, 2013, Dieter Cailliau wrote: > >> jdbc:h2:/tmp/x;DB_CLOSE_DELAY=-1;LOCK_TIMEOUT=5000 >> It's a small db (3M on a windows7) with small tables (about 100 rows). >> I'm using mul

Re: [h2] unable to write: "the database is read only" after system crash

Every insert gives this in bms.trace.db org.h2.jdbc.JdbcSQLException: The database is read only; SQL statement: insert into Element (lastSeen, sources, name, options, tupple, host_string, assets2, DTYPE, string) values (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, 'DeviceCapabilityService', ?) [90097-168]^M at

[h2] Re: unable to write: "the database is read only" after system crash

I'm using h2-1.3.168 in jboss 7.2.0.Final on a Win7. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "H2 Database" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to h2-database+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this gro

[h2] corrupt database 1.3.168

Here's another example of ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException at org.h2.index.PageDataLeaf.getRowAt: this happened on 1.3.168. The most recent fix i found in changelog about this kind of error was 1.3.166, so probably there's still something wrong since then, or have there been fixes related to thi