On 07/26/2011 01:47 PM, Stéphane Klein wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've this in my source code :
>
> from zope.interface import implements
> from transaction.interfaces import ISynchronizer
>
> class Synchronizer(object):
> implements(ISynchronizer)
>
> def beforeCompletion(self, transaction):
>
On 4/29/11 15:24 , Vincent Pelletier wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I need ZEO to be able to find non-packaged products for conflict resolution
> purposes. As ZEO AFAIK doesn't support this I gave it a quick try. I reached
> the "works for me" state, that I now would like to get feedback on.
>
> Basically, I tra
On 9/12/10 09:54 , Christian Theune wrote:
> On 09/10/2010 02:25 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 2:40 AM, Wichert Akkerman
>> wrote:
>>> I just got the following traceback from a system running 3.10.0b6:
>>
>> As I mentioned before, this looks
quot;,
line 99, in data
data = self.__dict__.pop('_container')
KeyError: 'pop(): dictionary is empty'
On 2010-9-10 08:40, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> I just got the following traceback from a system running 3.10.0b6:
>
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>
tware/buildout/eggs/ZODB3-3.10.0b6-py2.6-linux-x86_64.egg/ZODB/Connection.py",
line 257, in get
self._cache.new_ghost(oid, obj)
AssertionError: The given oid is already in the cache
is that likely to be a ZODB bug, or a bug in our application?
Wichert.
--
Wichert AkkermanIt is simp
On 5/24/10 13:59 , Vincent Pelletier wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I think the example on volatile attributes given in "Advanced ZODB for Python
> Programmers" article[1] shows a bad practice.
>
>> From the article:
> if hasattr(self, '_v_image'):
> return self._v_image
>
> This should be rewritte
On 5/11/10 19:41 , Chris Withers wrote:
> Jim Fulton wrote:
I plan to implement A soon if there are no objections.
Unless someone somehow convinced me to do D, I'll also add an
assertion in the Transaction.join method to raise an error if a
data manager joins more than once
On 4/14/10 08:24 , Christian Theune wrote:
> I'm pretty sure it's not. IIRC fsync is defined by POSIX and absolutely
> requires the implementor to flush data physically to disk ensuring its
> persistency. If that doesn't hold true then all transactions are borked.
That was the problem with fsync
On 3/22/10 16:04 , Sylvain Viollon wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 10:37:05 -0400
> Tres Seaver wrote:
>
>Hello,
>
>> Sylvain Viollon wrote:
>>
>>> I am currently testing gocept.zeoraid, and this seems to work
>>> fine.
>>>
>>> However, I have few questions:
>>>
>>> - On the pypi the
wrong list I suspect? :)
On 2/25/10 14:56 , Adam GROSZER wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Looks like zope.publisher burps on unicode URL which contain non-ascii
> chars. This is from a KGS 3.4 application, but looking at the source
> it still seems to have the same problems.
>
> opinions?
>
> ...
> self.
a whole plethora of options:
zope.catalog, zc.catalog, repoze.catalog, hurry.query, and possibly
others as well.
Wichert.
--
Wichert AkkermanIt is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple.
___
F
ven use zc.catalog or similar tools to create that
mapping - you would get a lot of query options for free with those as well.
Wichert.
--
Wichert AkkermanIt is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple.
_
are used in the same
process(es)/threads.
Wichert.
--
Wichert AkkermanIt is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple.
___
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
http://www.zope.org/Wikis/
On 11/13/09 21:33 , Shane Hathaway wrote:
> I've been studying how to build an enormous database based on what I
> know. There are an incredible number of distributed databases these
> days, but all of them concern me in one way or another.
Can you share some of those concerns with us? I'ld be in
filesystems can do tail packing which means you will loose a lot
of diskspace, and the amount of files can slow down directory operations
and fsck.
Wichert.
--
Wichert AkkermanIt is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple.
__
On 8/11/09 15:29 , Dominique Arnoult wrote:
> Hello,
> i deal with a problem of /tmp. I have a 1 Go partition and cannot easily
> change it. I run a Zeo cluster of 7 clients. Since the lsof command, I
> can see 7 process and each process has 4 files opened of 100 Mb max.
> That corresponds of the c
On 4/3/09 3:43 PM, Chris Withers wrote:
> I'm particularly interested in how you'll move the SAN from the primary
> to the secondary node in the even of primary node failure, and how
> you'll bring the secondary's zeo server up when that happens.
>
Doesn't ZEORaid work for you?
W.
_
On 4/3/09 1:41 PM, Chris Withers wrote:
> buildout said easy_install barfed:
>
> Installing zeoinstance.
> Getting distribution for 'ZODB3'.
> error: Setup script exited with error: None
> An error occured when trying to install ZODB3 3.9.0a12.Look above this
> message f
> or any errors thatwere ou
On 4/2/09 4:36 PM, Christian Theune wrote:
> ZODB has autoincrement support for one type: OIDs.
>
> The problem of autoincrement is that this needs to be handled outside
> the scope of transactions.
>
> In a distributed fashion this seems rather hard to do in comparison to
> just buying into confli
od.
Please note that Zope 2.11.7 is not supported for Plone 3.1.7. You
should be able to use ZODB 3.9 with Zope 2.10.x though.
Wichert.
--
Wichert AkkermanIt is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple.
_
On 11/11/08 4:10 PM, Izak Burger wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
I'm going to restore svn from a backup and see where that leaves us.
I'm going to disable svn access while I work on this.
Good luck :-) I know a little something about the hard work involved in
recovering subversion repos, in
On 11/1/08 1:17 PM, David Pratt wrote:
> Hi guys.
>
> repoze has package is useful for solving the transaction management
> issue.
>
> http://svn.repoze.org/repoze.tm2
>
repoze.tm2 is a WSGI middleware wrapper around the transaction package
that was split out from ZODB. It does not add magic
Christophe Combelles wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:32:52 +0200, Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> Christophe Combelles wrote:
>>> Zvezdan Petkovic a écrit :
>>>> On Oct 12, 2008, at 5:51 AM, Christophe Combelles wrote:
>>>>
>
> At the bottom of that section is also stated.
>>
>> "Indentation is not required for doctest blocks."
>>
>> Yes, they can be indented, but there is absolutely no need to change a
>> perfectly valid reST only to introduce a whitespace change in SVN and
he ZODB or add module aliases.
Wichert.
--
Wichert Akkerman<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple.
___
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
http://w
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
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 set to 1 gigabyte on an instance with a sin
RelStorage Zope capped its memory usage at 200mb.
Wichert.
--
Wichert Akkerman<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple.
___
For more information about ZODB, s
__run
compileflags, 1) in test.globs
File "", line 1, in ?
File "/private/tmp/wichert/3.8.1b8/src/ZEO/tests/forker.py", line
198, in shutdown_zeo_server
ack = s.recv(1024)
KeyboardInterrupt
Wichert.
--
Wicher
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Aug 1, 2008, at 11:13 AM, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Jul 31, 2008, at 1:53 PM, Chris Withers wrote:
What I'd *really* like is a stable zodb release with Christian's
patches for zeoraid and Shane's patches for RelStorage that then
feeds
ristians patches. If they are bug fixes, they
could make it into 3.8. I plan to include Shane's patches in 3.9. I'm
not sure when there will be a stable release of 3.9.
Do you know where there will be a new 3.8 stable release?
Wichert.
--
Wichert Akkerman<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
nderstand a new memcache client library was written for
MySQL (libmemcache is quite horrible). Python bindings for that library
would improve many things, including this :)
Wichert.
--
Wichert Akkerman<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/
.
We already have a complete design with proper layouts on new.zope.org.
We just need more content.
Wichert.
--
Wichert Akkerman<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to ma
age, just go to the Ruby buzz, translate the
hype in terms of the ZODB, tone it down some, and add that it's been
battle-tested for a decade.
I assume you mean http://new.zope.org/projects/zodb ? It's there,
waiting for the rest of that site to be finished.
Wichert.
--
Wichert
nt
from enterprise customers. That means we can not use NFS mounts to store
blobs.
Wichert.
--
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple.
___
For
Jim Fulton wrote:
I don't see any mention of this under 3.8.1 in the NEWS.txt on the
3.8.1 branch.
Please add a news item.
Sorry about that, fixed.
Wichert.
--
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/ It is h
Since nobody objected I have backported the ZEO authentication patch
from trunk to the 3.7 and 3.8 branches. In the meantime someone also
filed a bugreport for this issue
(https://bugs.launchpad.net/zodb/+bug/220856) which is fixed by this change.
Wichert.
--
Wichert Akkerman <[EM
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
I think the onle proposed changes that would be in this new 3.9 are your
Scratch the proposal--I suggested it when I didn't realize Zope 2.11b1
was already out.
invalidation patch and my authentication patch, is that correct?
Considerin
to do that.
Now I'ld love to have a release from current trunk as well to be able to
have an official release with blob support, but I understand that that
may not be realistic short term.
Wichert.
--
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> It is simple to make things.
http://www.wigg
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
I would like to get that fix in for Zope 2.11, which will use ZODB
3.8. Are there any objections to changing this there as well? This is
a bit of a grey area between a bugfix and completing an unfinished
feature, and I'm do not know what the
in for Zope 2.11, which will use ZODB 3.8. Are
there any objections to changing this there as well? This is a bit of a grey
area between a bugfix and completing an unfinished feature, and I'm do not
know what the rules for ZODB development are.
Wichert.
--
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL P
40 matches
Mail list logo
