, 2011, at 6:39 PM, Shane Hathaway wrote:
> On 06/22/2011 04:37 PM, Shane Hathaway wrote:
>> On 06/22/2011 04:27 PM, Erik Dahl wrote:
>>> Ugh. Ok I'll see what we get. So I'm clear we are looking for references
>>> to the object/tid pairs that don'
Ugh. Ok I'll see what we get. So I'm clear we are looking for references to
the object/tid pairs that don't exist. Pack will take at lest 2 days to run. :(
-EAD
On Jun 22, 2011, at 5:08 PM, Shane Hathaway wrote:
> On 06/21/2011 07:18 AM, Erik Dahl wrote:
>> I&
I'm using relstorage 1.4.2 during a batch job I was running last night I got
the following errors.
2011-06-21 07:55:02,664 WARNING relstorage: POSKeyError on oid 23916102: no tid
found; Current transaction is 256466219826629358; Recent object tids: []
2011-06-21 07:55:02,665 WARNING relstorage
wrote:
> On 03/29/2011 07:39 PM, Erik Dahl wrote:
>> I was running a pack and canceled so that I could reboot my box. After it
>> came back up I tried to restart the pack and got this:
> [...]
>> File
>> "/opt/zenoss/lib/python2.6/site-packages/RelStorage-1.4.2-p
ode will refill the table and go on its way.
Thoughts?
-EAD
On Mar 29, 2011, at 11:00 PM, Erik Dahl wrote:
> Ok I'm starting to understand things a little better. The transaction
> 255911127406517196 was the last transaction who's references were added to
> the objec
--+
| count(*) |
+--+
| 3907 | -- and again
+--+
1 row in set (0.00 sec)
-EAD
On Mar 29, 2011, at 9:39 PM, Erik Dahl wrote:
> I was running a pack and canceled so that I could reboot my box. After it
> came back up I tried to restart the pack and got this:
>
>
I was running a pack and canceled so that I could reboot my box. After it came
back up I tried to restart the pack and got this:
2011-03-29 20:53:07,259 [zodbpack] INFO Opening storage (RelStorageFactory)...
2011-03-29 20:53:07,457 [zodbpack] INFO Packing storage (RelStorageFactory).
2011-03-29
Zope 2.
-EAD
Erik A. Dahl
Co-Founder and CTO, Zenoss Inc.
phone: 443-837-2597
http://www.zenoss.com
On Dec 23, 2009, at 3:40 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Erik Dahl wrote:
>> We use undo from time to time in a zeo setup. When it works it can
>&g
We use undo from time to time in a zeo setup. When it works it can be
a life saver! :) If it goes away I guess it wouldn't be the end of
the world though.
-EAD
Erik A. Dahl
Co-Founder and CTO, Zenoss Inc.
phone: 443-837-2597
http://www.zenoss.com
On Dec 23, 2009, at 3:26 PM, Jim Fulton
009, at 11:21 AM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Erik Dahl wrote:
>> Guys,
>>
>> Thanks for all the great feedback. Still processing it but here are
>> somethings we will try.
>>
>> We will also
>> look at tuning out curre
Guys,
Thanks for all the great feedback. Still processing it but here are
somethings we will try.
RelStorage - in our app context to see if there it helps / hurts. will
report back results. Quick tests show some improvement. We will also
look at tuning out current ZEO setup. Last time I
Relstorage but perhaps
> other backends might be the better choice - something one must
> consider
> when starting a new project.
>
> -aj
>
> Am 04.12.09 15:41, schrieb Erik Dahl:
>> Guys,
>>
>> We have a product written in python using ZODB/ZEO and I would
Guys,
We have a product written in python using ZODB/ZEO and I would like to
improve the speed of database in general. Things that I have seen
that I would like to improve some I understand and some not.
1. Loading of largish (but not too large object had a list with around
20K references
d us
from the optimization problem pointed out in this thread?
-EAD
On Jul 14, 2008, at 2:26 PM, Erik Dahl wrote:
Got it I will look for a different strategy.
-EAD
On Jul 7, 2008, at 9:38 AM, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Jul 2, 2008, at 8:07 AM, Erik Dahl wrote:
I have a situation where I want to muta
Got it I will look for a different strategy.
-EAD
On Jul 7, 2008, at 9:38 AM, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Jul 2, 2008, at 8:07 AM, Erik Dahl wrote:
I have a situation where I want to mutate the class of an instance
This is not a use case supported by ZODB.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton
Zope Corporation
I have a situation where I want to mutate the class of an instance
like this:
inst.__class__ = NewClass
I'm in zeo land. When I do this in one client things work fine. But
of course the other clients who have already loaded the instance still
hold the old class. Restarting them gets the
16 matches
Mail list logo
