You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openjpa.apache.org by Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com> on 2007/04/11 23:09:24 UTC
OPENJPA-134 and the 0.9.7 release
Question...
Now that Abe has graciously resolved OpenJPA-134 (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-134), I would really like to
see this get included into the 0.9.7 release. This fix looks to resolve the
redundant sql joins that were dogging the performance of certain
benchmarks. By including this fix in the 0.9.7 release, I think our OpenJPA
story would be all that much better.
Since we haven't started a vote yet, are there any issues with either
re-cutting the 0.9.7 branch or applying Abe's fix to the 0.9.7 branch before
starting a vote? I would assume that neither of these options would cause
much headache for Mike (famous last words)...
Kevin
Re: OPENJPA-134 and the 0.9.7 release
Posted by Abe White <aw...@bea.com>.
> Generally in favor of including this performance patch with the
> release. Just a few questions:
>
> 1. How good is the patch? Has it been put through whatever
> extensive Unit Tests tests anyone has?
As others have said, it does pass the OpenJPA test suite, but
unfortunately that isn't saying all that much. AFAIK it hasn't been
put through the old Kodo test suite. Of course I always think my
code is correct, but it'd be nice if someone could put it through
whatever performance tests prompted the bug report in the first place
(the whole suite, not just the particular cases with extra joins).
If I did screw up the fix, it probably wouldn't break anything
functional, but would instead result in less optimal SQL than before.
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
Re: OPENJPA-134 and the 0.9.7 release
Posted by Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com>.
On 4/11/07, Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > 1. How good is the patch? Has it been put through whatever extensive
> > > Unit Tests tests anyone has?
> >
> > It passes all the OpenJPA tests against Derby and HSQL. It also passes
> > some other integration tests as well.
>
>
> It also works with DB2. I haven't been able to check out the performance
> benchmark yet, but functionally, it looks good.
>
> > 2. How easy is it to respin the release? I'd hope that this is a
> > > matter of a few hours but I'm not the one doing the work ;-)
> >
> > It shouldn't be hard. Grabbing the feature is probably the harder part,
> > and making the decision about whether to just throw away the branch and
> > re-branch or pick up the one feature.
>
>
> I've already started this conversation with Mike. He agrees that it's
> probably the right thing to do (to pick up openjpa-134), so he's willing
> to
> eat the extra work.
It actually shouldn't be too bad. I'm going to start over from with a new
openjpa-0.9.7-RC1 branch though - might as well get the rest of the fixes
too.
Kevin
>
>
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Craig.Russell@Sun.COM [mailto:Craig.Russell@Sun.COM]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 2:32 PM
> > > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: OPENJPA-134 and the 0.9.7 release
> > >
> > > Generally in favor of including this performance patch with the
> > > release. Just a few questions:
> > >
> > > 1. How good is the patch? Has it been put through whatever extensive
> > > Unit Tests tests anyone has?
> > >
> > > 2. How easy is it to respin the release? I'd hope that this is a
> > > matter of a few hours but I'm not the one doing the work ;-)
> > >
> > > Procedurally there is no issue since Mike hasn't yet called
> > > for a vote.
> > >
> > > I'd be happy if the patch were included in the release candidate
> > > because it's the release candidate that the community should be
> > > testing. And if this patch has any issues, we'll hear about it.
> > >
> > > Craig
> > >
> > > On Apr 11, 2007, at 2:09 PM, Kevin Sutter wrote:
> > >
> > > > Question...
> > > >
> > > > Now that Abe has graciously resolved OpenJPA-134 (
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-134), I would really
> > > > like to
> > > > see this get included into the 0.9.7 release. This fix looks to
> > > > resolve the
> > > > redundant sql joins that were dogging the performance of certain
> > > > benchmarks. By including this fix in the 0.9.7 release, I think
> > > > our OpenJPA
> > > > story would be all that much better.
> > > >
> > > > Since we haven't started a vote yet, are there any issues
> > > with either
> > > > re-cutting the 0.9.7 branch or applying Abe's fix to the 0.9.7
> > > > branch before
> > > > starting a vote? I would assume that neither of these options
> > > > would cause
> > > > much headache for Mike (famous last words)...
> > > >
> > > > Kevin
> > >
> > > Craig Russell
> > > Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> > > 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> > > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or
> > legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
> or
> > entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and
> > have received this message in error, please immediately return this by
> email
> > and then delete it.
> >
>
--
-Michael Dick
Re: OPENJPA-134 and the 0.9.7 release
Posted by Kevin Sutter <kw...@gmail.com>.
> > 1. How good is the patch? Has it been put through whatever extensive
> > Unit Tests tests anyone has?
>
> It passes all the OpenJPA tests against Derby and HSQL. It also passes
> some other integration tests as well.
It also works with DB2. I haven't been able to check out the performance
benchmark yet, but functionally, it looks good.
> 2. How easy is it to respin the release? I'd hope that this is a
> > matter of a few hours but I'm not the one doing the work ;-)
>
> It shouldn't be hard. Grabbing the feature is probably the harder part,
> and making the decision about whether to just throw away the branch and
> re-branch or pick up the one feature.
I've already started this conversation with Mike. He agrees that it's
probably the right thing to do (to pick up openjpa-134), so he's willing to
eat the extra work.
Kevin
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Craig.Russell@Sun.COM [mailto:Craig.Russell@Sun.COM]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 2:32 PM
> > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: OPENJPA-134 and the 0.9.7 release
> >
> > Generally in favor of including this performance patch with the
> > release. Just a few questions:
> >
> > 1. How good is the patch? Has it been put through whatever extensive
> > Unit Tests tests anyone has?
> >
> > 2. How easy is it to respin the release? I'd hope that this is a
> > matter of a few hours but I'm not the one doing the work ;-)
> >
> > Procedurally there is no issue since Mike hasn't yet called
> > for a vote.
> >
> > I'd be happy if the patch were included in the release candidate
> > because it's the release candidate that the community should be
> > testing. And if this patch has any issues, we'll hear about it.
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > On Apr 11, 2007, at 2:09 PM, Kevin Sutter wrote:
> >
> > > Question...
> > >
> > > Now that Abe has graciously resolved OpenJPA-134 (
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-134), I would really
> > > like to
> > > see this get included into the 0.9.7 release. This fix looks to
> > > resolve the
> > > redundant sql joins that were dogging the performance of certain
> > > benchmarks. By including this fix in the 0.9.7 release, I think
> > > our OpenJPA
> > > story would be all that much better.
> > >
> > > Since we haven't started a vote yet, are there any issues
> > with either
> > > re-cutting the 0.9.7 branch or applying Abe's fix to the 0.9.7
> > > branch before
> > > starting a vote? I would assume that neither of these options
> > > would cause
> > > much headache for Mike (famous last words)...
> > >
> > > Kevin
> >
> > Craig Russell
> > Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> > 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
> >
> >
>
> Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
> information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
> entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or
> legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or
> entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and
> have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email
> and then delete it.
>
RE: OPENJPA-134 and the 0.9.7 release
Posted by Patrick Linskey <pl...@bea.com>.
> 1. How good is the patch? Has it been put through whatever extensive
> Unit Tests tests anyone has?
It passes all the OpenJPA tests against Derby and HSQL. It also passes
some other integration tests as well.
> 2. How easy is it to respin the release? I'd hope that this is a
> matter of a few hours but I'm not the one doing the work ;-)
It shouldn't be hard. Grabbing the feature is probably the harder part,
and making the decision about whether to just throw away the branch and
re-branch or pick up the one feature.
-Patrick
--
Patrick Linskey
BEA Systems, Inc.
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
by email and then delete it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Craig.Russell@Sun.COM [mailto:Craig.Russell@Sun.COM]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 2:32 PM
> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: OPENJPA-134 and the 0.9.7 release
>
> Generally in favor of including this performance patch with the
> release. Just a few questions:
>
> 1. How good is the patch? Has it been put through whatever extensive
> Unit Tests tests anyone has?
>
> 2. How easy is it to respin the release? I'd hope that this is a
> matter of a few hours but I'm not the one doing the work ;-)
>
> Procedurally there is no issue since Mike hasn't yet called
> for a vote.
>
> I'd be happy if the patch were included in the release candidate
> because it's the release candidate that the community should be
> testing. And if this patch has any issues, we'll hear about it.
>
> Craig
>
> On Apr 11, 2007, at 2:09 PM, Kevin Sutter wrote:
>
> > Question...
> >
> > Now that Abe has graciously resolved OpenJPA-134 (
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-134), I would really
> > like to
> > see this get included into the 0.9.7 release. This fix looks to
> > resolve the
> > redundant sql joins that were dogging the performance of certain
> > benchmarks. By including this fix in the 0.9.7 release, I think
> > our OpenJPA
> > story would be all that much better.
> >
> > Since we haven't started a vote yet, are there any issues
> with either
> > re-cutting the 0.9.7 branch or applying Abe's fix to the 0.9.7
> > branch before
> > starting a vote? I would assume that neither of these options
> > would cause
> > much headache for Mike (famous last words)...
> >
> > Kevin
>
> Craig Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
Re: OPENJPA-134 and the 0.9.7 release
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Generally in favor of including this performance patch with the
release. Just a few questions:
1. How good is the patch? Has it been put through whatever extensive
Unit Tests tests anyone has?
2. How easy is it to respin the release? I'd hope that this is a
matter of a few hours but I'm not the one doing the work ;-)
Procedurally there is no issue since Mike hasn't yet called for a vote.
I'd be happy if the patch were included in the release candidate
because it's the release candidate that the community should be
testing. And if this patch has any issues, we'll hear about it.
Craig
On Apr 11, 2007, at 2:09 PM, Kevin Sutter wrote:
> Question...
>
> Now that Abe has graciously resolved OpenJPA-134 (
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-134), I would really
> like to
> see this get included into the 0.9.7 release. This fix looks to
> resolve the
> redundant sql joins that were dogging the performance of certain
> benchmarks. By including this fix in the 0.9.7 release, I think
> our OpenJPA
> story would be all that much better.
>
> Since we haven't started a vote yet, are there any issues with either
> re-cutting the 0.9.7 branch or applying Abe's fix to the 0.9.7
> branch before
> starting a vote? I would assume that neither of these options
> would cause
> much headache for Mike (famous last words)...
>
> Kevin
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!