You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to ojb-dev@db.apache.org by Martin Kalén <mk...@apache.org> on 2005/03/04 01:31:05 UTC
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Latest on 1.0.2 and Oracle-testing:
All tests now pass on the OJB_1_0_RELEASE-branch with oracle9i-profile,
PlatformOracle9iImpl, except for one test in the OTM-suite [1] that is a
consistent failure across all platforms.
broker/odmg/soda/otm for oracle9i:
Tests run: 615, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 163,5 sec
Tests run: 129, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 19,562 sec
Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 3,375 sec
Tests run: 79, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 16,11 sec
broker/odmg/soda/otm for hsqldb:
Tests run: 615, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 77,313 sec
Tests run: 129, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 13,875 sec
Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 7,469 sec
Tests run: 79, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 18,375 sec
I say +1 for a release if other platforms pass all but testSwizzle1toN!
Since we have started to use proper BLOB and CLOB for BlobTest it would
be best to re-test other platforms as well, so that we can adjust the
Torque-patch if needed.
Regards,
Martin
[1] It fails because RemovalAwareCollection.clear() has no effect. See:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.ojb.devel/9328
Jakob asked me to check his refactoring of this in OJB1.1, which I have
not have time to do yet - I think I'm letting this one pass since it's
across all platforms and no regression since 1.0.1 (although a big flaw
if RAC should really delete objects on clear?).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Thomas Dudziak <to...@gmail.com>.
I've checked in most of my changes (commit notice is larger than 100K
so didn't make it to the list), but need a bit more time to handle
indirection tables correctly and update/fix a few test cases. Sorry
for the delay.
Tom
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Armin Waibel <ar...@apache.org>.
Thomas Dudziak wrote:
> Brian,
> could you wait for me with the creation of the 1.0.2 release ? I'm
> currently finishing changes/additional features for the XDoclet
> module, which I'm (hopefully) able to check in the next hours.
>
Sorry, I need more time too. After fixing of the collection proxy
problems for 1:n relations, some new issues with m:n handling occur (we
all know Murphy's law ;-)).
regards,
Armin
> regards,
> Tom
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Thomas Dudziak <to...@gmail.com>.
Brian,
could you wait for me with the creation of the 1.0.2 release ? I'm
currently finishing changes/additional features for the XDoclet
module, which I'm (hopefully) able to check in the next hours.
regards,
Tom
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Martin Kalén <mk...@apache.org>.
Armin Waibel wrote:
> Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
>> i added a new testcase to ColectionTest which passes without problems.
>> after a little digging i think the RAC is ok but there are some
>> problems in the otm tx. before tx#commit the RAC looks ok.
>
> Why don't skip this test?
> No one is working on the OTM stuff the api is beta/alpha state, so we
> can fix this later. Think we should discuss the future of the OTM api
> after the next release.
OK, reasonable point now that Jakob has isolated and proved that
RemovalAwareCollection is OK.
I'm going to put in a clear() call anyway to make sure that all
collection clear methods are equal on all JVM:s and versions (as seen in
earlier posts I don't read Sun JDK1.3 JavaDoc as safe in the assumption
that removeAllElements must always call clear, it only says the should
perform the same operation).
I will mark the failing test as a known issue.
Regards,
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Martin Kalén <mk...@apache.org>.
Brian McCallister wrote:
>> Why don't skip this test?
>> No one is working on the OTM stuff the api is beta/alpha state, so we
>> can fix this later. Think we should discuss the future of the OTM api
>> after the next release.
>
> I agree.
Done!
(See also release notes and feel free to "tweak" the announcement.)
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Brian McCallister <br...@chariotsolutions.com>.
On Mar 9, 2005, at 3:12 PM, Armin Waibel wrote:
> Why don't skip this test?
> No one is working on the OTM stuff the api is beta/alpha state, so we
> can fix this later. Think we should discuss the future of the OTM api
> after the next release.
I agree.
-Brian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Armin Waibel <ar...@apache.org>.
Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
> hi martin,
>
> i added a new testcase to ColectionTest which passes without problems.
> after a little digging i think the RAC is ok but there are some problems
> in the otm tx. before tx#commit the RAC looks ok.
>
Why don't skip this test?
No one is working on the OTM stuff the api is beta/alpha state, so we
can fix this later. Think we should discuss the future of the OTM api
after the next release.
regards,
Armin
> jakob
>
> Jakob Braeuchi schrieb:
>
>> hi martin,
>>
>> it looks like a caching problem in eclipse.
>> when i add invalidateAll() before obtaining the tx i can reproduce the
>> error:
>>
>> _conn.invalidateAll();
>> tx = _kit.getTransaction(_conn);
>>
>> i'll try to write e testcase for RemovalAwareCollection based on pb-api.
>>
>> jakob
>>
>> Martin Kalén schrieb:
>>
>>> Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
>>>
>>>> i do also have a problem when running the testcases from command
>>>> line (ant junit) but i cannot reproduce this behaviour within eclipse ?
>>>>
>>>> i ran SwizzleTests without any errors or failures within eclipse.
>>>> pg.getAllArticlesInGroup() is always a vector:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am using IntelliJ IDEA for debugging (where I see the
>>> RemovalAwareCollection), only thing I can think of is that .project
>>> file is not refering to OJB:s compiled classes or something similar...
>>>
>>> Martin
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Jakob Braeuchi <jb...@gmx.ch>.
hi martin,
i added a new testcase to ColectionTest which passes without problems.
after a little digging i think the RAC is ok but there are some problems
in the otm tx. before tx#commit the RAC looks ok.
jakob
Jakob Braeuchi schrieb:
> hi martin,
>
> it looks like a caching problem in eclipse.
> when i add invalidateAll() before obtaining the tx i can reproduce the
> error:
>
> _conn.invalidateAll();
> tx = _kit.getTransaction(_conn);
>
> i'll try to write e testcase for RemovalAwareCollection based on pb-api.
>
> jakob
>
> Martin Kalén schrieb:
>
>> Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
>>
>>> i do also have a problem when running the testcases from command line
>>> (ant junit) but i cannot reproduce this behaviour within eclipse ?
>>>
>>> i ran SwizzleTests without any errors or failures within eclipse.
>>> pg.getAllArticlesInGroup() is always a vector:
>>
>>
>>
>> I am using IntelliJ IDEA for debugging (where I see the
>> RemovalAwareCollection), only thing I can think of is that .project
>> file is not refering to OJB:s compiled classes or something similar...
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Jakob Braeuchi <jb...@gmx.ch>.
hi martin,
it looks like a caching problem in eclipse.
when i add invalidateAll() before obtaining the tx i can reproduce the
error:
_conn.invalidateAll();
tx = _kit.getTransaction(_conn);
i'll try to write e testcase for RemovalAwareCollection based on pb-api.
jakob
Martin Kalén schrieb:
> Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
>
>> i do also have a problem when running the testcases from command line
>> (ant junit) but i cannot reproduce this behaviour within eclipse ?
>>
>> i ran SwizzleTests without any errors or failures within eclipse.
>> pg.getAllArticlesInGroup() is always a vector:
>
>
> I am using IntelliJ IDEA for debugging (where I see the
> RemovalAwareCollection), only thing I can think of is that .project file
> is not refering to OJB:s compiled classes or something similar...
>
> Martin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Martin Kalén <mk...@apache.org>.
Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
> i do also have a problem when running the testcases from command line
> (ant junit) but i cannot reproduce this behaviour within eclipse ?
>
> i ran SwizzleTests without any errors or failures within eclipse.
> pg.getAllArticlesInGroup() is always a vector:
I am using IntelliJ IDEA for debugging (where I see the
RemovalAwareCollection), only thing I can think of is that .project file
is not refering to OJB:s compiled classes or something similar...
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Jakob Braeuchi <jb...@gmx.ch>.
hi martin,
i do also have a problem when running the testcases from command line
(ant junit) but i cannot reproduce this behaviour within eclipse ?
i ran SwizzleTests without any errors or failures within eclipse.
pg.getAllArticlesInGroup() is always a vector:
...
tx = _kit.getTransaction(_conn);
tx.begin();
pg = (ProductGroup) _conn.getObjectByIdentity(pgOid);
pg.getAllArticlesInGroup().clear(); <<< it's a Vector !?
tx.commit();
tx = _kit.getTransaction(_conn);
tx.begin();
pg = (ProductGroup) _conn.getObjectByIdentity(pgOid);
assertEquals("should be equal", 0,
pg.getAllArticlesInGroup().size()); <<< it's a Vector !?
tx.commit();
...
jakob
Jakob Braeuchi schrieb:
> hi martin,
>
> i ran the test on it's own and on an initially loaded db.
>
> jakob
>
> Martin Kalén schrieb:
>
>> Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
>>
>>> i have a printout of your original post here; but i do not have a
>>> problem ;)
>>
>>
>>
>> Weirdness... Strange that both Brian and I get this fault and you
>> don't. I will re-run the tests and do some more checking using
>> different db:s.
>>
>> After 1.0.2 release though, since I've seen this before and know it's
>> no new regression.
>>
>> > pg.getAllArticlesInGroup() returns a Vector not a RAC.
>>
>> Weirdness once again - I clearly got a RAC as return object. I was
>> even single-stepping through calls into RAC in my debugger.
>>
>>> btw. Vector#clear() calls removeAllElements.
>>
>>
>>
>> OK good, so then my thread regarding RAC is a no-issue.
>>
>> Hmm... just checked the JavaDoc at
>> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/docs/api/java/util/Vector.html#clear()
>> and
>> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/docs/api/java/util/Vector.html#removeAllElements(),
>> and it seems that there is no guarantee for this, if you run on
>> different JVM implementations.
>>
>> To rename the RAC-internal clear code to clear() and call this from
>> removeAllElements() would be the safest bet. But since you have
>> refactored things anyway in CVS trunk this might not be applicable at
>> all anymore?
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Jakob Braeuchi <jb...@gmx.ch>.
hi martin,
i ran the test on it's own and on an initially loaded db.
jakob
Martin Kalén schrieb:
> Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
>
>> i have a printout of your original post here; but i do not have a
>> problem ;)
>
>
> Weirdness... Strange that both Brian and I get this fault and you don't.
> I will re-run the tests and do some more checking using different db:s.
>
> After 1.0.2 release though, since I've seen this before and know it's no
> new regression.
>
> > pg.getAllArticlesInGroup() returns a Vector not a RAC.
>
> Weirdness once again - I clearly got a RAC as return object. I was even
> single-stepping through calls into RAC in my debugger.
>
>> btw. Vector#clear() calls removeAllElements.
>
>
> OK good, so then my thread regarding RAC is a no-issue.
>
> Hmm... just checked the JavaDoc at
> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/docs/api/java/util/Vector.html#clear() and
> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/docs/api/java/util/Vector.html#removeAllElements(),
> and it seems that there is no guarantee for this, if you run on
> different JVM implementations.
>
> To rename the RAC-internal clear code to clear() and call this from
> removeAllElements() would be the safest bet. But since you have
> refactored things anyway in CVS trunk this might not be applicable at
> all anymore?
>
> Martin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Martin Kalén <mk...@apache.org>.
Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
> i have a printout of your original post here; but i do not have a
> problem ;)
Weirdness... Strange that both Brian and I get this fault and you don't.
I will re-run the tests and do some more checking using different db:s.
After 1.0.2 release though, since I've seen this before and know it's no
new regression.
> pg.getAllArticlesInGroup() returns a Vector not a RAC.
Weirdness once again - I clearly got a RAC as return object. I was even
single-stepping through calls into RAC in my debugger.
> btw. Vector#clear() calls removeAllElements.
OK good, so then my thread regarding RAC is a no-issue.
Hmm... just checked the JavaDoc at
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/docs/api/java/util/Vector.html#clear() and
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/docs/api/java/util/Vector.html#removeAllElements(),
and it seems that there is no guarantee for this, if you run on
different JVM implementations.
To rename the RAC-internal clear code to clear() and call this from
removeAllElements() would be the safest bet. But since you have
refactored things anyway in CVS trunk this might not be applicable at
all anymore?
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Jakob Braeuchi <jb...@gmx.ch>.
hi martin,
i have a printout of your original post here; but i do not have a
problem ;)
pg.getAllArticlesInGroup() returns a Vector not a RAC. btw.
Vector#clear() calls removeAllElements.
jakob
Martin Kalén schrieb:
> Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
>
>> what's the problem with the SwizzleTest ? i can run it successfully
>> with hsqldb.
>
>
> That's weird - for me SwizzleTests#testSwizzle1toN fails consistently on
> oracle9i, hsqldb and postgresql. (The assertion on line 351 is false,
> there is still 1 object in the db.)
>
> When I debugged the test-case I saw that RemovalAwareCollection.clear()
> did not remove the items from the database, check my findings here:
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.ojb.devel/9328
>
> Martin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Martin Kalén <mk...@apache.org>.
Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
> what's the problem with the SwizzleTest ? i can run it successfully with
> hsqldb.
That's weird - for me SwizzleTests#testSwizzle1toN fails consistently on
oracle9i, hsqldb and postgresql. (The assertion on line 351 is false,
there is still 1 object in the db.)
When I debugged the test-case I saw that RemovalAwareCollection.clear()
did not remove the items from the database, check my findings here:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.ojb.devel/9328
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Jakob Braeuchi <jb...@gmx.ch>.
hi martin,
what's the problem with the SwizzleTest ? i can run it successfully with
hsqldb.
jakob
Martin Kalén schrieb:
> Brian McCallister wrote:
>
>>Looks good, though I have 2 failures, one in QueryTest#
>> /**
>> * Test pathExpression and Extents
>> */
>> public void testReportPathExpressionForExtents2()
>
> <snip/>
>
>> crit.addLike("allArticlesInGroup.articleName", "%\u00f6%");
>>//unicode for ö
>
>
> This one passed with PG8 (+Oracle9i, +hsqldb...) on Windows.
>
>
>>One in SwizzleTests:
>> public void testSwizzle1toN() throws Exception
>
> <snip/>
>
> You do not have to dig deeper than the mail archives! :-)
>
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.ojb.devel/9328
>
> Regards,
> Martin
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Martin Kalén <ma...@curalia.se>.
Brian McCallister wrote:
> Looks good, though I have 2 failures, one in QueryTest#
> /**
> * Test pathExpression and Extents
> */
> public void testReportPathExpressionForExtents2()
<snip/>
> crit.addLike("allArticlesInGroup.articleName", "%\u00f6%");
> //unicode for ö
This one passed with PG8 (+Oracle9i, +hsqldb...) on Windows.
> One in SwizzleTests:
> public void testSwizzle1toN() throws Exception
<snip/>
You do not have to dig deeper than the mail archives! :-)
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.ojb.devel/9328
Regards,
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by "Robert S. Sfeir" <ro...@codepuccino.com>.
+1 for Sunday 3/13/05 (US date :-) )
On Mar 7, 2005, at 1:15 PM, Thomas Dudziak wrote:
> Release of 1.0.2 at Sunday, 13.3.05 ?
>
> +1
>
> Tom
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>
Robert S. Sfeir
robert(at)codepuccino.com
"Make everything as simple as possible,
but not simpler" - Einstein
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Martin Kalén <mk...@apache.org>.
Brian McCallister wrote:
>> Sunday [1] sounds good to me! My mail was not an official vote (I'm
>> not on the PMC), although I appreciate the support. :)
>
> Release votes for OJB have always been by committers, at least as long
> as I have been around (which isna that long compared to some others, but
> hey =)
OK, cool - no need to be so formal the next time around then. :)
>> Who can wrap things up and get a package out the door?
>
> I can do the release again, will try to make careful step by step notes
> on it as I go this time =)
That's a great initiative; one step towards shorter release-cycles is
that more people can do things like this.
Cheers,
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Brian McCallister <br...@chariotsolutions.com>.
On Mar 7, 2005, at 1:30 PM, Martin Kalén wrote:
> Sunday [1] sounds good to me! My mail was not an official vote (I'm
> not on the PMC), although I appreciate the support. :)
Release votes for OJB have always been by committers, at least as long
as I have been around (which isna that long compared to some others,
but hey =)
> Who can wrap things up and get a package out the door?
I can do the release again, will try to make careful step by step notes
on it as I go this time =)
-Brian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Martin Kalén <mk...@apache.org>.
Thomas Dudziak wrote:
> Release of 1.0.2 at Sunday, 13.3.05 ?
Sunday [1] sounds good to me! My mail was not an official vote (I'm not
on the PMC), although I appreciate the support. :)
Who can wrap things up and get a package out the door?
Regards,
Martin
[1] That is, Sunday 13.3.05 German format, 3/13/05 US format and
05-03-13 Swedish/ISO format. :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Thomas Dudziak <to...@gmail.com>.
Release of 1.0.2 at Sunday, 13.3.05 ?
+1
Tom
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Martin Kalén <mk...@apache.org>.
Martin Kalén wrote:
> Tests with CVS head
NAK!
OJB_1_0_RELEASE-branch it should say. (*doh*)
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by "Robert S. Sfeir" <ro...@codepuccino.com>.
+1
R
On Mar 7, 2005, at 12:56 PM, Martin Kalén wrote:
> I would say we ignore the Mac "ö"-encoding problem and
> swizzle1toN-failure since none of them are regression in OJB1.0.2
> compared to 1.0.1 release.
>
> Tests with CVS head with these two as known issues have then passed
> for hsqldb, PostgreSQL, Oracle9i.
>
> How about a vote for 1.0.2 release after MySQL and sapDB/maxDB
> retesting?
>
> (My +1 is in the pipe already...) ;)
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>
>
> !DSPAM:422c95f567551800865974!
>
Robert S. Sfeir
robert(at)codepuccino.com
"Make everything as simple as possible,
but not simpler" - Einstein
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Martin Kalén <mk...@apache.org>.
I would say we ignore the Mac "ö"-encoding problem and
swizzle1toN-failure since none of them are regression in OJB1.0.2
compared to 1.0.1 release.
Tests with CVS head with these two as known issues have then passed for
hsqldb, PostgreSQL, Oracle9i.
How about a vote for 1.0.2 release after MySQL and sapDB/maxDB retesting?
(My +1 is in the pipe already...) ;)
Cheers,
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Brian McCallister <br...@apache.org>.
Looks good, though I have 2 failures, one in QueryTest#
/**
* Test pathExpression and Extents
*/
public void testReportPathExpressionForExtents2()
{
ArrayList list = new java.util.ArrayList();
Criteria crit = new Criteria();
crit.addLike("groupName", "%o%");
crit.addLike("allArticlesInGroup.articleName", "%\u00f6%");
//unicode for ö
ReportQueryByCriteria q =
QueryFactory.newReportQuery(ProductGroup.class, crit, true);
q.setAttributes(new String[]{"groupId", "groupName"});
Iterator iter = broker.getReportQueryIteratorByQuery(q);
while(iter.hasNext())
{
list.add(iter.next());
}
// Groups: 3 Books , 1 Dairy Product
assertEquals("check size", list.size(), 2);
}
One in SwizzleTests:
public void testSwizzle1toN() throws Exception
{
clearTestData();
Transaction tx = _kit.getTransaction(_conn);
tx.begin();
ProductGroup pg = new ProductGroup();
pg.setId(new Integer(77777));
pg.setName("1");
_conn.makePersistent(pg);
Article article = Article.createInstance();
article.setArticleId(new Integer(77777));
article.setStock(333);
pg.add(article);
article.setProductGroup(pg);
_conn.makePersistent(article);
Identity pgOid = _conn.getIdentity(pg);
tx.commit();
tx = _kit.getTransaction(_conn);
tx.begin();
pg = (ProductGroup) _conn.getObjectByIdentity(pgOid);
pg.getAllArticlesInGroup().clear();
tx.commit();
tx = _kit.getTransaction(_conn);
tx.begin();
pg = (ProductGroup) _conn.getObjectByIdentity(pgOid);
assertEquals("should be equal", 0,
pg.getAllArticlesInGroup().size());
tx.commit();
tx = _kit.getTransaction(_conn);
tx.begin();
pg = (ProductGroup) _conn.getObjectByIdentity(pgOid);
pg.getAllArticlesInGroup().add(article);
tx.commit();
tx = _kit.getTransaction(_conn);
tx.begin();
pg = (ProductGroup) _conn.getObjectByIdentity(pgOid);
assertEquals("should be equal", 1,
pg.getAllArticlesInGroup().size());
tx.commit();
clearTestData();
}
The first is a unicode thing, which is wonky in the Apple JVM, so if it
passes for you I don't trust my failure. Investigating the second right
now.
-Brian
On Mar 4, 2005, at 6:52 PM, Martin Kalén wrote:
> Brian McCallister wrote:
>> Postgres has slipped downhill:
>> [junit] Tests run: 615, Failures: 7, Errors: 12, Time elapsed:
>> 211.185 sec
>> [junit] Test org.apache.ojb.broker.AllTests FAILED
>> [junit] Running org.apache.ojb.odmg.AllTests
>> [junit] Tests run: 129, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed:
>> 26.91 sec
>> [junit] Running org.apache.ojb.soda.AllTests
>> [junit] Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 4.406
>> sec
>> [junit] Running org.apache.ojb.otm.AllTests
>> [junit] Tests run: 79, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed:
>> 18.614 sec
>> [junit] Test org.apache.ojb.otm.AllTests FAILED
>
> Brian; I've changed some stuff after looking at your test output --
> could you please re-test?
>
> With the latest stuff from OJB_1_0_BRANCH I get the following with
> PostgreSQL 8.0.1 and postgresql-8.0.309.jdbc2.jar JDBC-driver:
>
> [junit] Running org.apache.ojb.broker.AllTests
> [junit] Tests run: 615, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 142,125
> sec
> [junit] Running org.apache.ojb.odmg.AllTests
> [junit] Tests run: 129, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 16,235
> sec
>
> [junit] Running org.apache.ojb.soda.AllTests
> [junit] Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 2,516 sec
>
> [junit] Running org.apache.ojb.otm.AllTests
> [junit] Tests run: 79, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 13,953 sec
> [junit] Test org.apache.ojb.otm.AllTests FAILED
>
> If your results differ, make sure that no other connection is open to
> the TEMPLATE1 or OJBTEST database and make a full "ant clean junit",
> to avoid any stale testdata from old testruns.
>
> Regards,
> Martin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Martin Kalén <mk...@apache.org>.
Brian McCallister wrote:
> Postgres has slipped downhill:
>
> [junit] Tests run: 615, Failures: 7, Errors: 12, Time elapsed:
> 211.185 sec
> [junit] Test org.apache.ojb.broker.AllTests FAILED
>
> [junit] Running org.apache.ojb.odmg.AllTests
> [junit] Tests run: 129, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 26.91 sec
>
> [junit] Running org.apache.ojb.soda.AllTests
> [junit] Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 4.406 sec
>
> [junit] Running org.apache.ojb.otm.AllTests
> [junit] Tests run: 79, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 18.614 sec
> [junit] Test org.apache.ojb.otm.AllTests FAILED
Brian; I've changed some stuff after looking at your test output --
could you please re-test?
With the latest stuff from OJB_1_0_BRANCH I get the following with
PostgreSQL 8.0.1 and postgresql-8.0.309.jdbc2.jar JDBC-driver:
[junit] Running org.apache.ojb.broker.AllTests
[junit] Tests run: 615, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 142,125 sec
[junit] Running org.apache.ojb.odmg.AllTests
[junit] Tests run: 129, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 16,235 sec
[junit] Running org.apache.ojb.soda.AllTests
[junit] Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 2,516 sec
[junit] Running org.apache.ojb.otm.AllTests
[junit] Tests run: 79, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 13,953 sec
[junit] Test org.apache.ojb.otm.AllTests FAILED
If your results differ, make sure that no other connection is open to
the TEMPLATE1 or OJBTEST database and make a full "ant clean junit", to
avoid any stale testdata from old testruns.
Regards,
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Martin Kalén <mk...@apache.org>.
Brian McCallister wrote:
> Postgres has slipped downhill:
>
> [junit] Tests run: 615, Failures: 7, Errors: 12, Time elapsed:
> 211.185 sec
> [junit] Test org.apache.ojb.broker.AllTests FAILED
I'm sure that at least one or two failures are caused by BlobTest - if
you post some relevant oneliners re failing tests I can adjust the
Torque patch.
Antonio Gallardo (and others) also reported that pg is not happy with
"double" in the sql-script for testdb, if we start tweaking the
postgresql db.props we could change this one too (to eg "float8").
Regards,
Martin
P.S. You could also mail me your output files as attachments and I will
fix noise caused by recent Oracle-fixes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: OJB 1.0.2 ?
Posted by Brian McCallister <br...@apache.org>.
Postgres has slipped downhill:
[junit] Tests run: 615, Failures: 7, Errors: 12, Time elapsed:
211.185 sec
[junit] Test org.apache.ojb.broker.AllTests FAILED
[junit] Running org.apache.ojb.odmg.AllTests
[junit] Tests run: 129, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 26.91
sec
[junit] Running org.apache.ojb.soda.AllTests
[junit] Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 4.406
sec
[junit] Running org.apache.ojb.otm.AllTests
[junit] Tests run: 79, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 18.614
sec
[junit] Test org.apache.ojb.otm.AllTests FAILED
I'll see what I can do about it tomorrow.
-Brian
On Mar 3, 2005, at 7:31 PM, Martin Kalén wrote:
> Latest on 1.0.2 and Oracle-testing:
>
> All tests now pass on the OJB_1_0_RELEASE-branch with
> oracle9i-profile, PlatformOracle9iImpl, except for one test in the
> OTM-suite [1] that is a consistent failure across all platforms.
>
> broker/odmg/soda/otm for oracle9i:
> Tests run: 615, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 163,5 sec
> Tests run: 129, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 19,562 sec
> Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 3,375 sec
> Tests run: 79, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 16,11 sec
>
> broker/odmg/soda/otm for hsqldb:
> Tests run: 615, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 77,313 sec
> Tests run: 129, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 13,875 sec
> Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 7,469 sec
> Tests run: 79, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 18,375 sec
>
>
> I say +1 for a release if other platforms pass all but testSwizzle1toN!
>
>
> Since we have started to use proper BLOB and CLOB for BlobTest it
> would be best to re-test other platforms as well, so that we can
> adjust the Torque-patch if needed.
>
> Regards,
> Martin
>
> [1] It fails because RemovalAwareCollection.clear() has no effect. See:
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.ojb.devel/9328
>
> Jakob asked me to check his refactoring of this in OJB1.1, which I
> have not have time to do yet - I think I'm letting this one pass since
> it's across all platforms and no regression since 1.0.1 (although a
> big flaw if RAC should really delete objects on clear?).
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org