This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 170385 - 223s in ConnectionNode.canDestroy
Summary: 223s in ConnectionNode.canDestroy
Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Alias: None
Product: db
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Code (show other bugs)
Version: 6.x
Hardware: All All
: P3 blocker (vote)
Assignee: Jiri Rechtacek
URL: http://statistics.netbeans.org/except...
Keywords: PERFORMANCE
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-08-14 15:24 UTC by Exceptions Reporter
Modified: 2010-11-05 18:54 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Exception Reporter: 155871

Attachments
nps snapshot (48.93 KB, bin/nps)
2009-08-14 15:25 UTC, Exceptions Reporter 		Details
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Exceptions Reporter 2009-08-14 15:24:56 UTC 
Build: NetBeans IDE Dev (Build 200908022240)
VM: Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM, 1.6.0-b105, Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment, 1.6.0-b105
OS: Windows XP, 5.1, x86
Maximum slowness yet reported was 223910 ms, average is 223910
Comment 1 Exceptions Reporter 2009-08-14 15:25:01 UTC 
Created attachment 86251 [details]
nps snapshot
Comment 2 Jaroslav Tulach 2009-08-14 15:31:33 UTC 
ConnectionNode's canDestroy seems to connect to network which can be quite (~4min) slow. Probably just return true 
without checking anything.
Comment 3 Jiri Rechtacek 2009-08-21 09:50:14 UTC 
I don't agree with escalation to P2. It has been reported once on 'unsupported' DB/Driver. The proposed change means to
change implementation of all DB actions, most of them are using such approach. The pattern, first check presence of JDBC
connection (somehow has been connected), if yes then check if the connection is still opened or closed, is used in DB
tools for ages. In my point of view, it's work-intensive change which could be worthless just for once report.
Comment 4 Jiri Rechtacek 2010-11-05 18:54:55 UTC 
It has been reported just once for the last year. Probably was fixed already.