Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 21, OK: 19, UNKNOWN: 3
ZODB failures: that was me, playing with the buildbot On 08/30/2012 03:00 AM, Zope tests summarizer wrote: This is the summary for test reports received on the zope-tests list between 2012-08-28 00:00:00 UTC and 2012-08-29 00:00:00 UTC: See the footnotes for test reports of unsuccessful builds. An up-to date view of the builders is also available in our buildbot documentation: http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/process/buildbots.html#the-nightly-builds Reports received -- Best regards, Adam GROSZER -- Quote of the day: I'll worry about it tomorrow. - Scarlet O'Hara ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Restoring zLOG trunk
On 30 August 2012 15:56, Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote: On 29 August 2012 15:44, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote: On 08/29/2012 09:25 AM, Tres Seaver wrote: That base class has been gone since ZConfig 2.9.2. I don't think the Zope2 trunk has pinned / unpinned ZConfig in a long time, so I'm not sure why it would just now break (ZConfig 2.9.2 was released in February, and 2.9.3 in June). I just pushed a change to the Zope2 trunk to use the new speling. While Tres fixed the error on Zope trunk, the same fix is still needed by zLOG. According to http://svn.zope.org/repos/main/zLOG/README-trunk.txt: This package has been re-integrated into the Zope2 package. Maintenance happens on the 2.11 branch and new development could occur inside `Zope2/src/zLOG`. However, Zope 2.12, 2.13 and trunk still use the egg and the only place it seems to exist in that package is at /Zope/branches/2.11/lib/python/zLOG, presumably where it was moved from during eggification. I'm going to restore zLOG trunk by copying in the current 2.11 branch so it can be fixed in a similar manner. zLOG 2.12.0 released and Zope trunk versions.cfg updated to use it. Laurence ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Storm/ZEO deadlocks (was Re: [ZODB-Dev] [announce] NEO 1.0 - scalable and redundant storage for ZODB)
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 06:30:50AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 2:29 AM, Marius Gedminas mar...@gedmin.as wrote: On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 06:31:05PM +0200, Vincent Pelletier wrote: On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:31:20 +0200, Martijn Pieters m...@zopatista.com wrote : Anything else different? Did you make any performance comparisons between RelStorage and NEO? I believe the main difference compared to all other ZODB Storage implementation is the finer-grained locking scheme: in all storage implementations I know, there is a database-level lock during the entire second phase of 2PC, whereas in NEO transactions are serialised only when they alter a common set of objects. This could be a compelling point. I've seen deadlocks in an app that tried to use both ZEO and PostgreSQL via the Storm ORM. (The thread holding the ZEO commit lock was blocked waiting for the PostgreSQL commit to finish, while the PostgreSQL server was waiting for some other transaction to either commit or abort -- and that other transaction couldn't proceed because it was waiting for the ZEO lock.) This sounds like an application/transaction configuration problem. *shrug* Here's the code to reproduce it: http://pastie.org/4617132 To avoid this sort of deadlock, you need to always commit in a a consistent order. You also need to configure ZEO (or NEO) to time-out transactions that take too long to finish the second phase. The deadlock happens in tpc_begin() in both threads, which is the first phase, AFAIU. AFAICS Thread #2 first performs tpc_begin() for ClientStorage and takes the ZEO commit lock. Then it enters tpc_begin() for Storm's StoreDataManager and blocks waiting for a response from PostgreSQL -- which is delayed because the PostgreSQL server is waiting to see if the other thread, Thread #1, will commit or abort _its_ transaction, which is conflicting with the one from Thread #2. Meanwhile Thread #1 is blocked in ZODB's tpc_begin(), trying to acquire the ZEO commit lock held by Thread #2. I'm too fried right now to understand who's at fault here. Workarounds probably exist (use RelStorage instead of ZEO? Configure Storm to use a lower PostgreSQL transaction isolation level?). Maybe this problem would go away if Storm always went into tpc_begin() before ZEO. I've pinged the people in #storm on FreeNode about this, but haven't filed any bugs yet. Marius Gedminas -- Q: Wanting both frequent updates and stability/support is just wishing for a pony! A: Well, we're riding our ponies to the tune of several billion page views per month. Where's your pony? Oh, you didn't get one? -- http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Ubuntu_migration_FAQ signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 20, OK: 17, UNKNOWN: 2
This is the summary for test reports received on the zope-tests list between 2012-08-29 00:00:00 UTC and 2012-08-30 00:00:00 UTC: See the footnotes for test reports of unsuccessful builds. An up-to date view of the builders is also available in our buildbot documentation: http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/process/buildbots.html#the-nightly-builds Reports received [1]UNKNOWN : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.8 : Linux [2]UNKNOWN : Zope-trunk Python-2.7.3 : Linux Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.8 : Linux Zope-2.13 Python-2.6.8 : Linux Zope-2.13 Python-2.7.3 : Linux winbot / ZODB_dev py_265_win32 winbot / ZODB_dev py_265_win64 winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win32 winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win64 [3]winbot / z3c.contents_py_265_32 [4]winbot / z3c.coverage_py_265_32 [5]winbot / z3c.datagenerator_py_265_32 [6]winbot / z3c.layer.pagelet_py_265_32 [7]winbot / z3c.layer.ready2go_py_265_32 [8]winbot / z3c.menu.ready2go_py_265_32 [9]winbot / z3c.recipe.paster_py_265_32 [10] winbot / z3c.recipe.paster_py_265_32 [11] winbot / z3c.rml_py_265_32 [12] winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_254_win32 1.6.x [13] winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_265_win32 1.6.x [14] winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_265_win32 master [15] winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_265_win64 1.6.x [16] winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_265_win64 master [17] winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_270_win32 1.6.x [18] winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_270_win32 master [19] winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_270_win64 1.6.x [20] winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_270_win64 master [21] winbot / zope.app.twisted_py_265_32 [22] winbot / zope.testbrowser_py_265_32 winbot / ztk_10 py_254_win32 winbot / ztk_10 py_265_win32 winbot / ztk_10 py_265_win64 winbot / ztk_11 py_254_win32 winbot / ztk_11 py_265_win32 winbot / ztk_11 py_265_win64 winbot / ztk_11 py_270_win32 winbot / ztk_11 py_270_win64 Non-OK results -- [1]UNKNOWN UNKNOWN : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.8 : Linux https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067421.html [2]UNKNOWN UNKNOWN : Zope-trunk Python-2.7.3 : Linux https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067422.html [3]FAILED winbot / z3c.contents_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067412.html [4]FAILED winbot / z3c.coverage_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067410.html [5]FAILED winbot / z3c.datagenerator_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067407.html [6]FAILED winbot / z3c.layer.pagelet_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067406.html [7]FAILED winbot / z3c.layer.ready2go_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067408.html [8]FAILED winbot / z3c.menu.ready2go_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067409.html [9]FAILED winbot / z3c.recipe.paster_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067423.html [10] FAILED winbot / z3c.recipe.paster_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067414.html [11] FAILED winbot / z3c.rml_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067411.html [12] FAILED winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_254_win32 1.6.x https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067436.html [13] FAILED winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_265_win32 1.6.x https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067437.html [14] FAILED winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_265_win32 master https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067432.html [15] FAILED winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_265_win64 1.6.x https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067438.html [16] FAILED winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_265_win64 master https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067433.html [17] FAILED winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_270_win32 1.6.x https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067439.html [18] FAILED winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_270_win32 master https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067434.html [19] FAILED winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_270_win64 1.6.x https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067440.html [20] FAILED winbot / zc_buildout_dev py_270_win64 master https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067435.html [21] FAILED winbot / zope.app.twisted_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067415.html [22] FAILED winbot / zope.testbrowser_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-August/067413.html ___
