One way to potentially soften the impact of cache busting by spiders
might be to allow Zope to choose a particular ZODB connection based on
request parameters (like sessionid or requesting ip address, or most
likely user agent in the case of legitimate spiders). This is a
modification to Zope
I also use this feature but I would be happy to stop using it if it made
the code materially simpler to maintain.
- C
On Wed, 2005-06-29 at 15:31 -0400, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
On 6/29/05, Tim Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Tim Peters]
As before, I'd run a different ZEO server for
Refresh was never much of a timesaver for me. Pressing ctrl-C - up
arrow - return on the console from which I run Zope is my answer. I
know lots of people say that this is too slow, but on my most recent
project from the time I type runzope to the time I see ready to
handle requests is
real
FYI,
Last week, Christian Theune and I muscled the elderly ctheune-
blobsupport-branch of ZODB into shape to work again against the ZODB
trunk.
We ran into some interesting issues with supporting savepoints
(difficult to do efficiently with blobs, so we didn't try), I added
some
Hi Marcus,
There is a presentation about ZODB by Jim Fulton at
http://www.python.org/workshops/2000-01/proceedings/papers/fulton/zodb3.html .
This is probably one of the earliest and most in-depth presentations about the
subject.
http://www.zope.org/Wikis/ZODB/FrontPage is wildly useful for
I suppose folks includes me. ;-) I'll try to have a look this
week... Sorry, I've been avoiding any actual work over the last week
or so.
- C
On Jan 1, 2006, at 10:23 PM, Florent Guillaume wrote:
Could folks have a look and tell me what they think of the proposed
patch? Actually it is
of view: it would be great to have ZODB, ZOE, ZCatalog in
different eggs :-)
Tamas
Chris McDonough wrote:
See the egg intro doc at http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/
PythonEggs .
--
Tamas Hegedus, PhD | phone: (1) 919-966 0329
UNC - Biochem Biophys | fax: (1) 919-966
Rather than chucking this in the collector as-is, it would be useful
if you could get me the output of the ZEO log rather than the output
of the client log. Right now, the actual traceback is in the ZEO
log; the client log only shows that a conflict error happened; not
where it happened.
On Feb 1, 2006, at 11:02 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Hi Chris,
Chris McDonough wrote:
Rather than chucking this in the collector as-is, it would be
useful if you could get me the output of the ZEO log rather than
the output of the client log. Right now, the actual traceback is
in the ZEO
On Feb 1, 2006, at 11:12 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote:
What front end do you use to do the request distribution?
Pound.
*barf*
ew..
Works great.
- C
___
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
http
On Feb 2, 2006, at 3:11 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote:
Pound.
*barf*
ew..
Works great.
Except it doesn't balance load and can't do SSL correctly, right? ;-)
I use Apache for the SSL and it balances load well enough for me.
Can we stop talking now? ;-)
- C
On Mar 3, 2006, at 8:08 AM, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 10:03:48PM -0500, Chris McDonough wrote:
| I'm taking a stab at packaging the various pieces of ZODB as eggs.
| One of the things I'd like to do is to separate the packages of ZODB
| that are currently shipped together
On Mar 3, 2006, at 10:13 AM, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
| Well, yes. I've already done that. But it's a hack. The runtime
| dependencies aren't a problem, it's the build-time dependencies. I
| don't know of a way to say use this header file from this egg to
| build this other egg in an egg
On Mar 3, 2006, at 11:46 AM, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
Go go!
I don't understand the eggs philosophy. (I succeeded in missing the
eggs talk twice at PyCon.) I don't think any of the pieces of ZODB
are very useful in isolation. You can't use persistent without
transaction, and there isn't much
On Mar 3, 2006, at 11:47 AM, Jim Fulton wrote:
BTW, the turbogears folks are interested in using transaction. The
transaction
package has shallow dependencies on ZODB. A nice start would be to
release
a separate transaction egg that doesn't depend on ZODB. (Hint,
we'll need a separate
to be modified, maybe the function names in
the code are misleading).
- C
On Mar 19, 2006, at 2:37 PM, Dieter Maurer wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote at 2006-3-18 20:58 -0500:
If yaml (or pysyck) supports all of the features of pickle, it's
theoretically possible. You would need to track down
Fine by me.
- C
On May 31, 2006, at 1:22 AM, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
I was looking, and trying to understand why 'tempstorage' is not
included in the ZODB.
Since some people might want to share sessions between ZEO clients,
and that 'tempstorage' is what is mounted as
On May 31, 2006, at 9:08 AM, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 09:53:14AM +0200, Tino Wildenhain wrote:
| Sidnei da Silva schrieb:
| I was looking, and trying to understand why 'tempstorage' is not
| included in the ZODB.
|
| Since some people might want to share sessions between
On May 31, 2006, at 10:58 PM, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 09:59:36AM -0400, Chris McDonough wrote:
|
| On May 31, 2006, at 9:55 AM, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
|
| On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 09:49:49AM -0400, Chris McDonough wrote:
| | I've done this (at least with FileStorage) and it's
Since your exception is happening during __del__ and since AFAIK no
guarantees are made as to what will exist is sys.modules during any
given object's __del__, it's maybe not suprising that you're getting
this exception. I don't know that this has anything to do with ZODB
in particular.
On Aug 21, 2006, at 9:13 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
David Pratt wrote:
Can you advise whether blobs will make it the trunk any time soon.
I see an extfile package now for z3 but would rather see
filesystem storage dealt with at the backend than in the app
itself. Many thanks.
Chris
On Oct 2, 2006, at 5:38 PM, Juan Pablo Giménez wrote:
I'm not blaming the zope team... zope is great!
but the real problem wasn't a deleted file... was a corrupted
file... and a sysadmin who doesn't read the log file...
but... if zope knows about the corrupted Data.fs, why
On Nov 8, 2007, at 9:14 AM, Jim Fulton wrote:
class TransactionFailedError(Exception):
Cannot perform an operation on a transaction that
previously failed.
An attempt was made to commit a transaction, or to join a
transaction,
but this transaction previously raised an
On Nov 8, 2007, at 6:25 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
Why not subclass TransactionError?
It didn't before. Should it?
Seems logical, but I'm not looking that closely. :)
OK.
How about zope.transaction?
Guido recently told me that people in the Python community at large
assume that anything
On Nov 9, 2007, at 7:52 AM, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Nov 8, 2007, at 7:46 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
How about zope.transaction?
Guido recently told me that people in the Python community at
large assume that anything in the Zope namespace is assumed to be
Zope specific, so I'd rather
On Nov 9, 2007, at 8:41 AM, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Nov 9, 2007, at 8:31 AM, Chris McDonough wrote:
It also contains TimeStamp, which will get moved out of persistent.
Why?
I don't see any uses of TimeStamp by the transaction package. In
your new package, it is only used by its tests
On Nov 9, 2007, at 9:43 AM, Jim Fulton wrote:
Yawn. IMO, the test command in setuptools is a waste of time,
because it doesn't work with anything else.
It runs all the tests, even the doctests, if thats what you mean.
See the additional_tests hair in the test modules.
My point is
On Nov 9, 2007, at 12:10 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
BTW, it would be nice to now remove the transaction package from
the ZODB trunk and make it a dependency.
Yes. ZODB's setup.py is polyglotic... it works if setuptools isn't
installed. I suspect it shouldn't continue to given that it now
Christian fixed these failures, after I hosed things.
These were second-level failures. The first level failure was that
the tests couldn't be run at all. The way Christian found the failure
was that he had a buildbot which couldn't successfully run the tests
because the buildbot didn't
FTR, I tagged a release of the new transaction package (http://svn.zope.org/transaction
) as 1.0a1 and uploaded it to PyPi http://pypi.python.org/pypi/transaction/1.0a1)
, which is essentially the ZODB transaction machinery divorced from
any ZODB package dependencies. The next ZODB release
Thomas Lotze wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
Chris McDonough did the transaction split off. He's probably the best one
to answer your other questions.
I know, but then he's subscribed to this list afaik, so I'll just wait for
him to respond.
I'm afraid I can't look at this right away but I'll put
ZODB uses an optimistic concurrency model to deal with simultaneous changes to
the same object from multiple connections. In practice, this means your
software needs to be willing to retry requests when they fail due to one of
these errors. Usually this means (in newer ZODBs), aborting the
On 4/28/09 1:54 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
An interim step, if we're in a hurry to get 3.9 out, is to simply add
the flag. This would disallow cross-database references in new
applications. These applications could still support multiple
databases by providing application-level traversal across
I'm not sure of the exact cause of this error, but I'll note that one your
deployment looks like it's using the slow (non-C) versions of the stuff in
zope.interface, which usually means that somehow the zope.interface C
extensions
couldn't be compiled. You might try checking this from a debug
Jim Fulton wrote:
So, I repeat: is anyone actually using undo these days?
I haven't used undo (not the APIs nor via any Zope UI) in years.
- C
___
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
http://www.zope.org/Wikis/ZODB/
ZODB-Dev mailing
list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zodb-dev
--
Chris McDonough
Agendaless Consulting, Fredericksburg VA
The repoze.bfg Web Application Framework Book: http://bfg.repoze.org/book
___
For more information about ZODB, see
On Wed, 2010-05-12 at 20:16 +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
C. I'd really like to be able to configure what the root object is as
database creation time. That way it can be application specific.
That sounds reasonable, but doesn't address the default behavior.
Default
I noticed some weird behavior with exceptions and transactions recently
(in particular, a WSGI server which relies on a __del__ to close its
client connection wasn't disconnecting from the client immediately when
a conflict error was raised by ZODB, but would indeed disconnect if a
conflict error
If no one complains, I'm going to make another transaction package
release this evening.
- C
___
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
http://www.zope.org/Wikis/ZODB/
ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org
Tagged and released to PyPI as 1.1.1.
- C
On Thu, 2010-09-16 at 15:05 -0400, Chris McDonough wrote:
If no one complains, I'm going to make another transaction package
release this evening.
- C
___
For more information about ZODB, see
The transaction package offers a nice feature, where you can say:
import transaction
for attempt in transaction.attempts(3):
with attempt as t:
... do something ...
If do something raises a ConflictError (or any other retryable error),
the next attempt is tried,
On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 08:33 +0200, Thierry Florac wrote:
I used this feature just a few days ago.
It was in a batch application where conflict errors can frequently
occur, and they **seemed** to be handled correctly.
I doubt it's working correctly if you have any retryable errors
happening
On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 17:06 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 14:21 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
...
A decorator for running some code in the context of a txn and retrying
retryable exceptions would be nice
On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 18:37 -0400, Chris McDonough wrote:
On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 17:06 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 14:21 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
...
A decorator for running some code
On Thu, 2012-03-29 at 07:18 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 17:06 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 14:21 -0400, Jim
On Sat, 2012-03-31 at 07:49 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-29 at 07:18 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 17:06 -0400, Jim
On Sun, 2012-12-16 at 22:10 +0100, Godefroid Chapelle wrote:
Le 15/12/12 01:52, Tres Seaver a écrit :
I fixed the remainig issues in persistent and released 4.0.5 today: its
tests properly exercise the C extensions Under Python 3.2 / 3.3.
I want to express my thanks to you, Tres, for
47 matches
Mail list logo
