GV

GeezerVison

The World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory.

Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites

On this site

  • Sign in
  • ActionsCI/CD and automation
  • CodespacesCloud development environments
  • All Features
  • Documentation
  • Training
  • Certifications
  • Build with Copilot
  • Customize Copilot
  • Integrations
  • Trending repos
  • GitHub Sponsors
  • Developer articles
  • Enterprises

This view

  • Original page
  • New address

GeezerVison is showing github.com — Fix to the way the 23 handles the object duration in type plus image fixes. by lwasylow · Pull Request #1310 · utPLSQL/utPLSQL

Conversation

@lwasylow

@lwasylow lwasylow commented Mar 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Updating builds and removing old versions of Oracle

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions
lwasylow added 15 commits March 8, 2026 12:47
@lwasylow
Removing old builds from build workflow
5d2faaf
@lwasylow
Improvments
098aca2
@lwasylow
Merge branch 'develop' of https://github.com/utPLSQL/utPLSQL into fea…
e913547 
…ture/remove_old_builds
@lwasylow
Fixing 19c
c213890
@lwasylow
Adding healthchecks
77d2ecc
@lwasylow
Testing delays
6dd6764
@lwasylow
Change images
a0d1344
@lwasylow
Merge branch 'develop' of https://github.com/utPLSQL/utPLSQL into fea…
7d0ff67 
…ture/remove_old_builds
@lwasylow
faststart
e10f48b
@lwasylow
update
5862a5f
@lwasylow
upoate
8c6fe6a
@lwasylow
Correct blanks
7ea7198
@lwasylow
Update
6288925
@lwasylow
Fixing duration
f1585ae
@lwasylow
Correct wrong vrsion
5400c7c
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Mar 8, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Test Results

    1 files    102 suites   2m 38s ⏱️
1 090 tests 1 086 ✅ 4 💤 0 ❌
1 094 runs  1 086 ✅ 8 💤 0 ❌

Results for commit a7b4d84.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Mar 8, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 95.04%. Comparing base (25dd48b) to head (a7b4d84).
⚠️ Report is 23 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #1310   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    95.04%   95.04%           
========================================
  Files          111      111           
  Lines         5368     5369    +1     
  Branches        33       33           
========================================
+ Hits          5102     5103    +1     
  Misses         266      266
Flag Coverage Δ
19se 95.09% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
21XE 95.24% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
23-free 94.98% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@lwasylow lwasylow changed the title Feature/remove old builds Fix to the way the 23 handles the object duration in type plus image fixes. Mar 8, 2026
@lwasylow

lwasylow commented Mar 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@jgebal Can you review and approve?
If you don't agree with a image changes we can take at least the reporter fix for the 23 error :)
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
lwasylow added 3 commits March 8, 2026 23:59
@lwasylow
revert
fdf4aba
@lwasylow
update task
83b486a
@lwasylow
Update release ver
40cbed5
jgebal
jgebal reviewed Mar 9, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment thread source/core/types/ut_reporter_base.tpb Outdated
end;

overriding member procedure on_event( self in out nocopy ut_reporter_base, a_event_name varchar2, a_event_item ut_event_item) is
l_event_item ut_event_item := a_event_item; -- ADD THIS LINE

@jgebal jgebal Mar 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

There was a problem hiding this comment.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why is this change needed?

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions

@lwasylow lwasylow Mar 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

There was a problem hiding this comment.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In the 23 apparently there is an issue with a duration of the object when casting/treat objects. I think it's oracle bug and is patched in some versions that object is no longer in memory when not using in out.
It's probably something that oracle should fix but easier to do it here then rely on their patch

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions

@jgebal jgebal Mar 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

There was a problem hiding this comment.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I have worked around that problem in our pipeline by using version 23.26.0 instead of 23.26.1.

It is strange to see this exception especially as a_event_item is actually in not in out.

I am not a big fan of making changes in code to workaround Oracle bugs but if it solves the problem permanently than it's OK.

Since it is a solution for a problem, please create a separate issue for that specific error we see, so the error is documented in repository and it should be referenced in code comment.
That way there is clarity why we use this redundant and unnecessary assignment.

With this we minimize the risk of introducing a regression at some point in future, when we are no longer using Oracle version 23.26.1 for builds and testing. Some users may still use it and be prone to the issue.

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions

@jgebal jgebal Mar 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

There was a problem hiding this comment.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I read your comment on #1310. This is resolving this problem then.
I will add a comment in code just to make it super clear.

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions
jgebal
jgebal reviewed Mar 9, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment thread .github/workflows/build.yml Resolved

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
jgebal
jgebal reviewed Mar 9, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment thread source/core/types/ut_reporter_base.tpb Resolved

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@jgebal
Update source/core/types/ut_reporter_base.tpb
a7b4d84
@sonarqubecloud

sonarqubecloud Bot commented Mar 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Quality Gate Passed Quality Gate passed

Issues
1 New issue
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
100.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
jgebal
jgebal approved these changes Mar 9, 2026
View reviewed changes
@lwasylow
lwasylow merged commit 45e3b57 into develop Mar 9, 2026
17 checks passed

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@lwasylow lwasylow mentioned this pull request Apr 21, 2026
fix: prevent ora-21799 in ut_run() #1318
Closed
@jgebal
jgebal deleted the feature/remove_old_builds branch April 22, 2026 15:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@jgebal jgebal jgebal approved these changes

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

2 participants

@lwasylow @jgebal
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
You are visitor 01402503 — GeezerVison does not store the pages you look up.
Best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.7 or Internet Explorer 6 at 800×600. No cookies required.