You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to derby-dev@db.apache.org by Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com> on 2008/05/01 10:14:32 UTC
PLEASE REVIEW: New release notes and changes generated for 10.3.3
Hi everyone,
I made a pass at making a real RELEASE-NOTES.html and CHANGES.html for
10.3.3.0 based on the latest code and JIRA results. The output is
here:
http://people.apache.org/~fuzzylogic/10.3.3.0/RELEASE-NOTES.html
http://people.apache.org/~fuzzylogic/10.3.3.0/CHANGES.html
Please let me know if you have any additions, clarifications, or
changes to make.
Thanks,
andrew
Re: PLEASE REVIEW: New release notes and changes generated for 10.3.3
Posted by Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Mike Matrigali <mi...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> I have the same concerns, we really don't want to undersell how hard it may
> be to get your data back. How about something like:
>
> <snip suggestion/>
Hi Mike,
Thanks for the suggestion, I've incorporated part of it. I want to
keep it brief, so I think we should ask users to post to derby-user if
they find they have been affected by this issue for advice specific to
their situation. Here's my proposed updated announcement:
-----
NOTICE TO ALL DERBY v10.3 USERS : CRITICAL FIX NOW AVAILABLE
The Bottom Line:
If you are currently using Derby 10.3.1.4 or Derby 10.3.2.1, it is strongly
recommended that you upgrade to Derby 10.4.1.3 or 10.3.3.0 to avoid
any chance of database corruption due to an issue with multiple threads
accessing a database that is documented in <a
href="issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3347">DERBY-3347</a>.
This bug can cause unrecoverable database corruption during periods of
heavy, multi-thread I/O operations. The error produced in the test case
used to diagnose the problem was:
ERROR XSDB3: Container information cannot change once written: was 0, now 80
It is felt that other errors might also be generated when this type of
corruption occurs. The corruption message will most likely refer to page 0
of the container. For example:
ERROR XSDG1: Page Page(0 ,Container(0, 5856)) could not be
written...
This bug corrupts the pages on disk and can go unnoticed. If you do not
run database consistency checks regularly it is recommended you begin doing
so as soon as possible after the upgrade. To insure that corruption has not
already occurred in existing databases, after upgrade run the database
consistency check at least once to validate all tables in the database. This
process is documented at:
http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/DatabaseConsistencyCheck
If the corruption has already occurred there is no guaranteed recovery of data
other than to recover from the last good backup. When doing so one should
also check that the previous backup did not also have the corruption.
In some cases one may recover data from the existing
database, depending on the extent of the corruption, but will require
by hand data recovery. Depending on the type of corruption this may
be successful or not. one should consult the Derby list if attempting
this recovery - no automatic software solution to this recovery exists.
Version 10.3.3.0 can be downloaded from:
http://db.apache.org/derby/releases/release-10.3.3.0.cgi
Version 10.4.1.3 can be downloaded from:
http://db.apache.org/derby/releases/release-10.4.1.3.cgi
For help or questions, please post to derby-user@db.apache.org.
For instructions on how to subscribe to derby-user, please see:
http://db.apache.org/derby/derby_mail.html
----
I'll begin building the release shortly, and will include this version
of the announcement in the release notes.
andrew
Re: PLEASE REVIEW: New release notes and changes generated for 10.3.3
Posted by Mike Matrigali <mi...@sbcglobal.net>.
I have the same concerns, we really don't want to undersell how hard it
may be to get your data back. How about something like:
If the corruption has already occurred there is no guaranteed recovery
of data other than to recover from the last good backup. When doing so
one should also check that the previous backup did not also have the
corruption.
In some cases one may recover data from the existing
database, depending on the extent of the corruption, but will require
by hand data recovery. Depending on the type of corruption this may
be successful or not. one should consult the Derby list if attempting
this recovery - no automatic software solution to this recovery exists.
Recovering data in this manner depends on the database being able to
boot, some instances of this corruption are uncovered during recovery
boot and in that case the situation is even harder to recover from.
This corruption affects one file at a time in derby, though may affect
multiple files in a single database. Tools exist to check the
consistency of all files in the database. Derby stores each index and base
table data in a single file so if only one file is corrupted other files
may be accessible.
Examples of ways one may try to salvage data from a corrupted database
include:
o dropping and recreating an existing index (but it may take software
hacking to get the drop of the index to work depending on the type of
corruption).
o dropping only the affected tables.
o By hand exporting data from affected tables and importing into a fresh
db created with software that has the fix.
Those that have lost critical data to this corruption and don't have a
backup should consult the experts on the list for ideas.
Andrew McIntyre wrote:
> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 1:14 AM, Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I made a pass at making a real RELEASE-NOTES.html and CHANGES.html for
>> 10.3.3.0 based on the latest code and JIRA results. The output is
>> here:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~fuzzylogic/10.3.3.0/RELEASE-NOTES.html
>> http://people.apache.org/~fuzzylogic/10.3.3.0/CHANGES.html
>>
>> Please let me know if you have any additions, clarifications, or
>> changes to make.
>
> Replying to my own mail because I want to bring up something I hope to
> get comments on a wording issue.
>
> The important notice, originally authored by Stan and updated by me,
> includes the following wording:
>
> "If corruption has already occurred the database will need to be recovered
> from the last good backup. There is no alternative solution."
>
> I wondering if I should soften this. On the one hand, if the
> corruption has occurred and it's just in an index, the user can just
> upgrade, drop and recreate the index, and they are good. In other
> words, maybe this is going a bit too far, as the user should be able
> to salvage some of their data if they've hit this problem.
>
> On the other hand, I think this is a sufficiently alarming statement
> that it will encourage users to upgrade to the new release as soon as
> possible.
>
> If there are no alternative suggestions, I will leave the text as is.
>
> thanks,
> andrew
>
Re: PLEASE REVIEW: New release notes and changes generated for 10.3.3
Posted by Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 1:14 AM, Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I made a pass at making a real RELEASE-NOTES.html and CHANGES.html for
> 10.3.3.0 based on the latest code and JIRA results. The output is
> here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~fuzzylogic/10.3.3.0/RELEASE-NOTES.html
> http://people.apache.org/~fuzzylogic/10.3.3.0/CHANGES.html
>
> Please let me know if you have any additions, clarifications, or
> changes to make.
Replying to my own mail because I want to bring up something I hope to
get comments on a wording issue.
The important notice, originally authored by Stan and updated by me,
includes the following wording:
"If corruption has already occurred the database will need to be recovered
from the last good backup. There is no alternative solution."
I wondering if I should soften this. On the one hand, if the
corruption has occurred and it's just in an index, the user can just
upgrade, drop and recreate the index, and they are good. In other
words, maybe this is going a bit too far, as the user should be able
to salvage some of their data if they've hit this problem.
On the other hand, I think this is a sufficiently alarming statement
that it will encourage users to upgrade to the new release as soon as
possible.
If there are no alternative suggestions, I will leave the text as is.
thanks,
andrew
Re: PLEASE REVIEW: New release notes and changes generated for 10.3.3
Posted by Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:58 AM, Knut Anders Hatlen <Kn...@sun.com> wrote:
>
> The changes and release notes look very good. I only have two minor
> comments to the release notes:
>
> 1) Under "Issues", it says:
>
> Compared with the previous release (10.3.2.1), Derby release 10.3.3.0
> introduces the following new features and incompatibilities.
>
> None of the issues listed are new features, though, and only one of them
> introduces an incompatibility.
I think the release notes generator has this text hardcoded. I'll fix
it up by hand for the actual release.
> 2) The build environment section says that Ant 1.7.0 is used, but the
> manifest file in the test candidate says Ant 1.6.5.
I'll fix this.
thanks for the feedback,
andrew
Re: PLEASE REVIEW: New release notes and changes generated for 10.3.3
Posted by Knut Anders Hatlen <Kn...@Sun.COM>.
Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com> writes:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I made a pass at making a real RELEASE-NOTES.html and CHANGES.html for
> 10.3.3.0 based on the latest code and JIRA results. The output is
> here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~fuzzylogic/10.3.3.0/RELEASE-NOTES.html
> http://people.apache.org/~fuzzylogic/10.3.3.0/CHANGES.html
>
> Please let me know if you have any additions, clarifications, or
> changes to make.
Hi Andrew,
The changes and release notes look very good. I only have two minor
comments to the release notes:
1) Under "Issues", it says:
Compared with the previous release (10.3.2.1), Derby release 10.3.3.0
introduces the following new features and incompatibilities.
None of the issues listed are new features, though, and only one of them
introduces an incompatibility.
2) The build environment section says that Ant 1.7.0 is used, but the
manifest file in the test candidate says Ant 1.6.5.
--
Knut Anders
Re: PLEASE REVIEW: New release notes and changes generated for 10.3.3
Posted by Kristian Waagan <Kr...@Sun.COM>.
Andrew McIntyre skrev:
> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Kathey Marsden
> <km...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> Kristian Waagan wrote:
>>
>>
>>> An
>>>
>>> Can you state your current plan for the release?
>>> There's a fix I want to get into the release, but at the moment it is not
>>>
>> entirely clear to me when you will produce it or if I'm already too late.
>>
>>>
>> I can't speak for Andrew but I don't think its too late. He said last call
>> is Friday, that would be tomorrow local time.
>>
>
> That's correct. I would like the cutoff to be 5pm PST Friday, May 2.
> Please let me know if you have something you really want to get in and
> you think it's not going to make it at that time and we'll discuss it.
>
Okay Andrew,
I believe I'm okay and done :) Just put in the fix I want to see in 10.3.
regards,
--
Kristian
> thanks,
> andrew
>
Re: PLEASE REVIEW: New release notes and changes generated for 10.3.3
Posted by Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Kathey Marsden
<km...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Kristian Waagan wrote:
>
> > An
> >
> > Can you state your current plan for the release?
> > There's a fix I want to get into the release, but at the moment it is not
> entirely clear to me when you will produce it or if I'm already too late.
> >
> >
> I can't speak for Andrew but I don't think its too late. He said last call
> is Friday, that would be tomorrow local time.
That's correct. I would like the cutoff to be 5pm PST Friday, May 2.
Please let me know if you have something you really want to get in and
you think it's not going to make it at that time and we'll discuss it.
thanks,
andrew
Re: PLEASE REVIEW: New release notes and changes generated for 10.3.3
Posted by Kathey Marsden <km...@sbcglobal.net>.
Kristian Waagan wrote:
> An
> Can you state your current plan for the release?
> There's a fix I want to get into the release, but at the moment it is
> not entirely clear to me when you will produce it or if I'm already
> too late.
>
I can't speak for Andrew but I don't think its too late. He said last
call is Friday, that would be tomorrow local time.
Kathey
Re: PLEASE REVIEW: New release notes and changes generated for 10.3.3
Posted by Kristian Waagan <Kr...@Sun.COM>.
Andrew McIntyre skrev:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I made a pass at making a real RELEASE-NOTES.html and CHANGES.html for
> 10.3.3.0 based on the latest code and JIRA results. The output is
> here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~fuzzylogic/10.3.3.0/RELEASE-NOTES.html
> http://people.apache.org/~fuzzylogic/10.3.3.0/CHANGES.html
>
> Please let me know if you have any additions, clarifications, or
> changes to make.
>
Hi Andrew,
Can you state your current plan for the release?
There's a fix I want to get into the release, but at the moment it is
not entirely clear to me when you will produce it or if I'm already too
late.
Thank you for making another release :)
regards,
--
Kristian
> Thanks,
> andrew
>