I have put a new proposal up at
http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/FasterStaticContentServing
which deals with serving large static content objects faster from Zope
2. This is based on some work that Paul Winkler and I did at the PyCon
Zope 2 sprint. Comments appreciated. I think this
Chris McDonough wrote:
http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/FasterStaticContentServing
Sounds good. WRT your comments on the need for a cache multiplexer so
one can handle the case of HTTP cache control headers opaque
server-side caches working together--I'm really wondering if a better
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 08:00, Chris McDonough wrote:
I have put a new proposal up at
http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/FasterStaticContentServing
which deals with serving large static content objects faster from Zope
2. This is based on some work that Paul Winkler and I did at the
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 08:00, Chris McDonough wrote:
I have put a new proposal up at
http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/FasterStaticContentServing
which deals with serving large static content objects faster from Zope
2. This is based on some work that Paul Winkler and I did at the
+1 from me I think its a great idea, I also agree with Jamie about HTTP
cache control feeling awkward at the moment not sure how it could be
better though
Jamie Heilman wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote:
http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/FasterStaticContentServing
Sounds good.
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 03:25, Jamie Heilman wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote:
http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/FasterStaticContentServing
Darn, I always forget that cross-posting is bad due to replies to both
lists. Sorry. I've limited this reply to the zope-dev list.
Sounds good.
moved just to zope-dev instead of both zope3-dev and zope-dev
Btw: does this also
- decrease memory usage during delivery time?
Probably. I haven't done any work to prove it, though. It can
theoretically prevent ZODB/ZEO cache thrashing, where large static
objects might consume a
Hi all,
I'm trying to use APE (yesterday CVS version) on Zope 2.7.0 and
Postgresql, but I'm not able to make it work.
With some minor changes in datatypes.py (change loadConf for load_conf),
it works fine using FSConnection, but DBAPIConnection seems not to be
ready to work together with ZConfig
Shane Hathaway wrote:
To do this, I would change Products/PageTemplates/Expressions.py. It
creates an expression evaluation engine and adds expression types to it.
It chooses the unrestricted or the restricted expression types based on
whether the Zope module exists. This is a wart.
Hi,
I've made a patch to manage_access (and
AccessControl.Role.permission_settings)
that displays the current effective security
setting (something that have been bugging me
for ages).
It also uses a small javascript and disabled
property of the checkboxes (with potential
problems with old
On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Chris Withers wrote:
Shane Hathaway wrote:
To do this, I would change Products/PageTemplates/Expressions.py. It
creates an expression evaluation engine and adds expression types to it.
It chooses the unrestricted or the restricted expression types based on
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm trying to use APE (yesterday CVS version) on Zope 2.7.0 and
Postgresql, but I'm not able to make it work.
You could do with being a bit more explicit about the problems you encountered.
Exception type, value and traceback please...
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content
Chris McDonough wrote:
I have put a new proposal up at
http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/FasterStaticContentServing
which deals with serving large static content objects faster from Zope
2. This is based on some work that Paul Winkler and I did at the PyCon
Zope 2 sprint. Comments
Hi All,
In Shared/DC/ZRDB/DA.py, Line 399 of Zope 2.6.1 and line 419 in 2.7.0, there's
this rather pointless lump of code:
try: DB__=dbc()
except: raise DatabaseError, (
'%s is not connected to a database' % self.id)
...which only serves to mask the real cause of the
Hi Chris,
In Shared/DC/ZRDB/DA.py, Line 399 of Zope 2.6.1 and line 419 in 2.7.0, there's
this rather pointless lump of code:
try: DB__=dbc()
except: raise DatabaseError, (
'%s is not connected to a database' % self.id)
...which only serves to
Hi there,
Clemens Robbenhaar wrote:
I remeber I made a collector issue about that liens of code:
http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/927
Indeed. Catching everything and raising a string exception is evil, and I was
glad to see that go.
Previously this has been a string valued exception.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any way to have a working config for postgresql and zope 2.7 ?
Or everybody is working with FileSystem storages and SQL storages are just
working with zope 2.6 ?
Thanks for reporting this. I just now brought the ZConfig schema up to
date. See the updated
Hi Chris,
[...]
...this is an application level decision. The code currently makes it very easy,
but at the expense of debugging any unexpected exceptions that code throws.
While relational data may be optional for you, for many people it is
ESSENTIAL, and is used for things like
After investigating (but not solving the problem...)
The objects are there, but some security stuff returns None instead of the
object when we aren't supposed to have the rights... (could someone tell me
what function is first called to get the value of an object such as
AUTHENTICATED_USER
Shane Hathaway escribió:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any way to have a working config for postgresql and zope 2.7
? Or everybody is working with FileSystem storages and SQL storages
are just
working with zope 2.6 ?
Thanks for reporting this. I just now brought the ZConfig schema up
moved to zope-dev only
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 09:28, Shane Hathaway wrote:
This sounds useful for serving content from the filesystem.
However, I'm a little concerned about this because producers must not
read from the object database.
I think the easiest thing to do is to turn this into a
Chris McDonough wrote:
IMO code that needs to read from the database shouldn't return a
producer. Instead, it should probably continue using the RESPONSE.write
streaming protocol in the worker thread when it needs to do
producer-like things. Returning a producer to ZPublisher seems to only
On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 13:32, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote:
IMO code that needs to read from the database shouldn't return a
producer. Instead, it should probably continue using the RESPONSE.write
streaming protocol in the worker thread when it needs to do
producer-like
Shane Hathaway wrote:
On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Chris Withers wrote:
That sounds mighty handy. What needs to happen for that to happen?
A voluntary volunteer needs to volunteer voluntarily.
I'll probably tackle it, but not before next month due to more
immediate fires.
--
Jamie Heilman
Chris Withers wrote at 2004-3-24 15:36 +:
...
The reason is that I would like to treat errors when accessing
an external data base different from other errors; often the data
obtained there is only optional to the page, so I don't want to show
usered the error page in this case, only to
25 matches
Mail list logo
