|
[
Permlink
| « Hide
]
David Sitsky added a comment - 10/Apr/08 01:25 AM
Example derby.log file running from quad-core machine 0.
Example derby.log file running from quad-core machines 3 and 4.
I wonder if this is related to
Some of the problems found in
Hi David,
It sounds like the problem is reliably reproducible in your environment. I have attached two patches to Hi Knut,
Something I didn't write in the description of this bug record but did write in my email is unfortunately it is not easy to reproduce. In a 24 hour run, where I had 22 individual JVM processes running across 6 quad-core machines (one machine only runs two processes), sometimes they would all run successfully, sometimes 1 or 2 processes may trigger the condition after many hours. Given that they are all independent processes, you can see it isn't that easy to reproduce - 22 days of "serial processing time" may trigger the condition. We have quite a lot of customers, but so far, only one has reported this issue to us. Unfortunately, our 6 quad-core system is heavily used, so I may not be able to access it soon for running this test, but will try to do so next week time permitting, but I can't promise anything unfortunately. I would actually recommend writing a small program with the table described in the bug report, and just an endless loop where you create random numbers of the two guid columns, with some random binary for the other. We just had a transaction which did a select on the two guid columns, and if it didn't exist, then did the insert, then the commit. This is basically what our application does. OK, thanks, I'll try to do that.
Hi Knut,
I now have access to my quad-core farm again. I have downloaded 10.4.1.2 and will hit my machines hard over the next few days with an older version of our software which had the issue reported in this bug record. If we don't see the corruption issue by then, we can probably safely assume it has been fixed. I'll let you know how things go. Cheers, David I have been running the software with 10.4.1.2 for almost 5 days now with no database corruption, so I would say with reasonable certainty that the issue has been fixed - many thanks! Looking forward to the imminent major release.
Cheers, David We believe this issue was one of the many ways
it looks like the 10.4 release fixes the problem. Closing this bug, please reopen or file a new issue if you manage to reproduce this error starting with a fresh database using the software with the fix for |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||