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 Kathey Marsden <km...@sbcglobal.net> on 2006/02/04 01:20:27 UTC
Re: svn commit: r374778 - in /db/derby/code/trunk/java: engine/org/apache/derby/iapi/services/classfile/
engine/org/apache/derby/impl/services/bytecode/ testing/org/apache/derbyTesting/functionTests/master/
testing/org/apache/derbyTesting/functionTests/tes...
djd@apache.org wrote:
Thanks Dan for the continued progress on my favorite issue. I am
looking forward to studying the patch sometime to actually understand
it, but in the meanwhile I just looked at the little stuff.
1) On the javadoc I found that eclipse generates javadoc like this,
but Rick reported that it actually causes a warning because there is
nothing after the @return
* @param pc
+ * @param additionalBytes
+ * @return
+ */
2) Would it make sense to bump up the starting value of the loop in the
test, now that you have made so much progress?
+PASS: PREPARE: Logical operators with 200 parameters
PASS: Logical operators with 200 parameters
+PASS: PREPARE: Logical operators with 300 parameters
PASS: Logical operators with 300 parameters
+PASS: PREPARE: Logical operators with 400 parameters
PASS: Logical operators with 400 parameters
-FAILED QUERY: Logical operators with 500 parameters.
+PASS: PREPARE: Logical operators with 500 parameters
+PASS: Logical operators with 500 parameters
+PASS: PREPARE: Logical operators with 600 parameters
+PASS: Logical operators with 600 parameters
+PASS: PREPARE: Logical operators with 700 parameters
+PASS: Logical operators with 700 parameters
+PASS: PREPARE: Logical operators with 800 parameters
+PASS: Logical operators with 800 parameters
+FAILED QUERY: Logical operators with 900 parameters.
Re: svn commit: r374778 - in /db/derby/code/trunk/java: engine/org/apache/derby/iapi/services/classfile/
engine/org/apache/derby/impl/services/bytecode/ testing/org/apache/derbyTesting/functionTests/master/
testing/org/apache/derbyTesting/functionTests/tes...
Posted by Daniel John Debrunner <dj...@apache.org>.
Kathey Marsden wrote:
> djd@apache.org wrote:
> Thanks Dan for the continued progress on my favorite issue. I am
> looking forward to studying the patch sometime to actually understand
> it, but in the meanwhile I just looked at the little stuff.
>
> 1) On the javadoc I found that eclipse generates javadoc like this,
> but Rick reported that it actually causes a warning because there is
> nothing after the @return
>
> * @param pc
> + * @param additionalBytes
> + * @return
> + */
Darn, thought I caught all of those. Sorry, now I already have some
changes in that file to address the more generic code overflow issues.
> 2) Would it make sense to bump up the starting value of the loop in the
> test, now that you have made so much progress?
The first few queries are pretty quick it's the later big union queries
that take the time. I'm working on further changes in this area, once I
touch the test again I will look at making sure the starting points are
not too far away from the failing points.
Dan.