I have an automation job that includes a Connection Iterator. If Toad's unable to make one of these connections for whatever reason, I can't see much in the way of a clue as to which connection it was that failed. For example, one of the connections has failed and the error I get is:
"Copy to clipboard" just gives the same:
Access violation at address 0000000005F7FE4E in module 'Toad.exe'. Read of address 0000000000000010
I can press the close button and the job will continue, but the output at the end gives me no indication of which connection the iterator failed on.
Am I missing something? Is there a way to get anything such as connection errors logged in the ouput?
Hi Paul.
We never want to show "access violation at address NNNNN" because it isn't helpful to anyone.
I made an app with a connection iterator that had 3 connections. The 2nd one had a shutdown database. I got this message when one of the connections can't be made, so I can see which one it failed on. Can you give me some more info about your situation so I can try to reproduce it?
OK, so it seems the autmation/connection iterator may be a red herring. It turns out I can reproduce that error reliably from the standard connection dialog. For example, if I have a tnsnames entry pointing to a server that doesn't exist. I think the key bit is this entry isn't in the main tnsnames file, but is linked in via an IFILE.
My tnsnames.ora contains an entry eg IFILE=C:\oracle\admin\tnsnames_dba.ora
That tnsnames_dba.ora contains the invalid entry, eg
PW_INVALID2=
(DESCRIPTION=
(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=TCP)(HOST=fakehost)(PORT=1521))
(CONNECT_DATA=
(SERVICE_NAME=fakeservice)
)
)
SQL*Plus finds the entry and gives the expected error:
C:\> sqlplus a/b@pw_invalid2
SQL*Plus: Release 19.0.0.0.0 - Production on Tue Apr 15 17:10:50 2025
Version 19.25.0.0.0
Copyright (c) 1982, 2024, Oracle. All rights reserved.
ERROR:
ORA-12545: Connect failed because target host or object does not exist
Toad also lists the entry in the Database dropdown, but trying to connect to it gives this access violation. The same entry in my main tnsnames file is handled better
Hi Paul
Thanks for taking the time to track that down and post the details. I can reproduce the access violation. This will be fixed in the next beta.
-John
1 Like