Hi.
I've been playing around with the new "cache-size-bytes" setting to
limit the ZODB cache sizes.
My ZODB 3.9.3 (Zope 2.12 / Plone) config had a setting of
cache-size-bytes to 128mb and a cache-size of one million (to
effectively disable the object number based checks). This was without
ZEO, a
Marius Gedminas wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 12:17:36PM +0200, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>> Chris Withers wrote:
>>> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>>>> They are incredibly expensive to unpickle since all
>>>> the DWIM magic in their __init__ get called e
Chris Withers wrote:
> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>> Nope. DateTime objects are plain old-style classes and don't inherit
>> from persistent.*.
>
> Hmm, oh well, my bad...
> In that case it must just be that their pickled form is huge compared to
> an i
them track their changes without incuring the
>>> expense of a separate database object.
>> +lots
>>
>> Hanno Schlichting recently posted a nice graph showing the persistent
>> structure of a Plone Page object and it's 9 (!) sub-objects.
>> http://blog.hannos
Jim Fulton wrote:
> On May 15, 2009, at 6:22 AM, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>
>> Am I correct to assume that sharing the blob-cache between the four
>> processes on the same physical machine is not supported, as these
>> don't
>> have any mechanism to synchron
Hi.
I have a configuration with one ZEO database server (ZODB 3.8.1) and two
physical servers housing four single-threaded ZEO clients each. There's
some 15gb of blob data in the (Plone) site.
Setting up and maintaining NFS to share direct access to the blob data
is beyond what I can support in p
Jim Fulton wrote:
> I've just released the first beta of ZODB 3.9.
Awesome :)
I thought there were some outstanding issues with the "cache-size-bytes"
functionality. Got all of these resolved / reviewed by now?
Thanks,
Hanno
___
For more information a
Chris Withers wrote:
> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>> Just be aware that ZODB 3.9 is not compatible with any stable Zope 2.x
>> release. It only works and is required for Zope 2.12. It can be made to
>> work with prior versions of Zope2 but that is a mild pain.
>
> What
Alan Runyan wrote:
> Is a ZODB 3.9 beta around the corner?
Just be aware that ZODB 3.9 is not compatible with any stable Zope 2.x
release. It only works and is required for Zope 2.12. It can be made to
work with prior versions of Zope2 but that is a mild pain.
Hanno
_
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> On 3/6/09 6:27 AM, eastxing wrote:
>> About one month ago, I asked a question about 'ZODB pack' and got
>> suggestions to update to new ZODB version.
>> It took me one month to update my site from Plone2.5.5(with
>> Zope2.9.6-final,ZODB3.6.2) to Plone3.1.7(with Zope2.10.
Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>> Shane Hathaway wrote:
>>> In addition to making the data format pluggable, the patch puts most of
>>> ZODB's dependencies on the cPickle module in one place, so now if we
>>> decide to improve our usag
Shane Hathaway wrote:
> I have just created a patch for ZODB that makes the object serialization
> format pluggable, meaning that it should now be possible to write Python
> code that causes ZODB to store in formats other than Python pickles.
Cool :)
> In addition to making the data format plug
Russ Ferriday wrote:
> In a warty old application, I'm hitting memory constraints that I think
> the 3.8.1 changes in ZODB might fix.
We are running both Plone 3.0 and 3.1 in production with ZODB 3.8.1 on
two quite large sites (one has RelStorage, the other one blob storage).
I'd consider it produ
Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Nov 4, 2008, at 12:12 PM, Benji York wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> A few months back, there was a lot of discussion here about BTree
>>> performance. I got a sense that maximum BTree-node and bucket sizes
>>> should b
Leonardo Santagada wrote:
> On Oct 4, 2008, at 7:35 PM, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>>
>> You can have a look at http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0307.
>>
>> I'd suggest you try this out on some small typical data set and just
>> look at the generated pickles.
Laurence Rowe wrote:
> Leonardo Santagada wrote:
>
>> Why doesn't zodb has a table of some form for this info? I heard that
>> sometimes for very small objects the string containing this
>> information can use up to 30% of the whole space of the file (using
>> FileStorage). How does RelStora
Jim Fulton wrote:
> I'd appreciate it if people would try it out soon.
Besides the RelStorage site where we were running into problems as
mentioned in the other thread, we also use the ZODB 3.8 branch (beta8
plus the first two beta fixes) in a smaller site with blob storage for
about a week in pro
Dieter Maurer wrote:
> Wichert Akkerman wrote at 2008-9-24 09:44 +0200:
>> Jim Fulton wrote:
>>> I'd appreciate it if people would try it out soon.
>>>
>> I can say that the combination of 3.8.1b8 and Dieter's
>> zodb-cache-size-bytes patch does not seem to work. With
>> zodb-cache-size-bytes
Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Sep 24, 2008, at 8:06 AM, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>
>> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>>> I can say that the combination of 3.8.1b8 and Dieter's
>>> zodb-cache-size-bytes patch does not seem to work. With
>>> zodb-cache-size-bytes set to 1 gigabyte on an instance with a single
>>>
Hi,
for those of you watching the commit lists closely I made a branch at:
svn://svn.zope.org/repos/main/ZODB/branches/hannosch-pickle-protocol-version2
which uses a very simple approach to using the pickle protocol version 2
in all parts of the ZODB by externalizing it into a constant in
config
101 - 120 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
