Thank you! A quick test shows that this works as expected. Alejandro
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Karl Wright <[email protected]> wrote: > It has been merged, yes. > Karl > > > On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Alejandro Calbazana <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> Cool. I will check it out. Quick question... Has CONNECTORS-1089 been >> merged into the dev_1x branch? I am interested in the document security >> with JDBC support in conjunction with this. >> >> Alejandro >> >> On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Karl Wright <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> A fix is available and is attached to the ticket. Alternatively, you >>> can check out the dev_1x branch or trunk. Please be aware that the schema >>> for dev_1x and trunk has changed, so unless you are using the >>> single-process example on the dev_1x branch, you will need to think about >>> upgrade. >>> >>> Thanks >>> Karl >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Karl Wright <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Alejandro, >>>> This is a problem with JDBC authority caching. See CONNECTORS-1109. >>>> I'll have a fix available shortly. >>>> >>>> Karl >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
