I just made this change in head, there is a comment in uPortal55.xml about connection validation and removed the actual validation queries. If moving to a universally valid query against a uPortal table is desired we can make that change. My vote would be a query against UP_VERSIONS since it should only have a row or two in it ensuring it returns very quickly.
Oh the Jira issue for my change is UP-1781 -Eric Susan Bramhall wrote: > If there isn't an acceptable universal validation query then I like > the idea of just leaving it in the comments of the current config > file. There are plenty of universally valid queries for the uP > database if we know the schema has been created but they wouldn't work > for the personDB anyway since that schema is opaque. > -Susan > > Andrew Petro wrote: >> Yes, that validation query in the default context descriptor template >> not working in all dbs was my bad. Brooklyn College was good enough >> to have me work on their portal last week and we discovered that >> introducing validating connections on checkout is very helpful and I >> was over-eager to share that default configuration with the uPortal >> world. >> >> Validating connections on checkout from the pool is in general a good >> thing. >> >> What if we were to introduce a new property in rdbm.properties >> supplying the validation query, to be token-replaced into the context >> descriptor like the other tokens are currently replaced, with >> examples of valid queries for each of the example RDBMS >> configurations in rdbm.properties? >> >> If a validation query isn't included in the default context >> descriptor, then inertia will lead to many uPortal deployments simply >> not using validation on connection checkout, and that seems like a >> missed opportunity. Rather than rolling back the change, I'd prefer >> to roll forward with the further tweaks necessary to make it >> successful. The problem here is not in concept -- it is in poor >> execution (my bad). >> >> Andrew >> >> >>> ...I think rolling back the validation query change would be a good >>> thing. >>> >>> -Eric >>> >>> George Lindholm wrote: >>> >>>> Cris J Holdorph wrote: >>>> >>>>> safe, but not nearly as performant as the 'select 1' varities. >>>>> >>>> No, but is a safe default value. And if we provide some alternate >>>> queries like Eric suggested >>>> each site can customize the query as appropriate. >>>> >>>> George >>>> >>>>> ---- Cris J H >>>>> >>>>> George Lindholm wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Cris J Holdorph wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I think the change in UP-1771 should be rolled back, until a better >>>>>>> more cross-database solution is developed. At least the major dbs >>>>>>> that most uPortal deployers are using (postgres, mysql, sql server, >>>>>>> oracle and HSQLDB for development). >>>>>>> >>>>>> The ultimate safe query would be "SELECT user_id FROM up_user WHERE >>>>>> user_id = 1" >>>>>> >>>>>> George >>>>>> >>>>>>> ---- Cris J H >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Eric Dalquist wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As good as a default validation query should be perhaps just a >>>>>>>> comment in the XML file with a few examples? Having to deal with >>>>>>>> figuring out what sort of query you need for your specific DB >>>>>>>> just to >>>>>>>> develop seems like a bit of a pain. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -Eric >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Susan Bramhall wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Oh thank you! I was wondering what broke my dev set up. >>>>>>>>> Since we >>>>>>>>> know the database contains certain tables we could make it >>>>>>>>> independent with something like "select 1 from up_versions" >>>>>>>>> which is >>>>>>>>> pretty innocuous. >>>>>>>>> Susan >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Parker Grimes wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Just a quick post regarding the recent fixed issue UP-1771. The >>>>>>>>>> validationQuery="SELECT 1" is invalid SQL in Oracle. You will >>>>>>>>>> end >>>>>>>>>> up with "java.sql.SQLException: ORA-00923: FROM keyword not >>>>>>>>>> found >>>>>>>>>> where expected" >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I fixed it in my uPortal55.xml file by changing that to >>>>>>>>>> "SELECT 1 >>>>>>>>>> FROM DUAL", but that is Oracle specific. I wonder if it would be >>>>>>>>>> better to define that select string in the rdbm.properties >>>>>>>>>> file so >>>>>>>>>> that uPortal55.xml picks it up from there and thus could be >>>>>>>>>> changed >>>>>>>>>> per database vendor (since all other connection details are >>>>>>>>>> pulled >>>>>>>>>> from there anyway). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Just my thoughts, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Parker >>>>>>>>>> Programmer / Analyst >>>>>>>>>> Southern Utah University >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: >>>>>>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see >>>>>>>>>> http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >> >> >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
