Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Timing the opening of network ports

2006-08-31 Thread Chris Withers
Christian Theune wrote: b) it's more convenient for developers Why? Early open port means: zopectl restart and reload in your browser immediately without getting Connection refused. Dieter already mentioned this use case I don't really buy that, but since it's configurable, it doesn't

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Timing the opening of network ports

2006-08-31 Thread Chris Withers
Andreas Jung wrote: The usecase is pretty simple: you have a loadbalancer and remove one backend Zope. The LB detects the removal and stops forwarding request. When the client comes back (means Zope opens the ports early) the LB will start forwarding to the client although it might take a

[Zope-dev] Re: Timing the opening of network ports

2006-08-31 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Andreas Jung wrote: --On 29. August 2006 18:37:45 +0100 Chris Withers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tres Seaver wrote: Unlike you, I prefer when the browser waits until Zope has come up over me having to reload manually until it finally is

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Timing the opening of network ports

2006-08-31 Thread Andrew Langmead
On Aug 31, 2006, at 9:41 AM, Tres Seaver wrote: The other reason for wanting early binding to the ports is if the ports are in the reserved for root range ( 1024); in that case, the ports *must* be bound early, before dropping privileges to those of the effective user. Not necessarily.

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Timing the opening of network ports

2006-08-31 Thread Chris Withers
Tres Seaver wrote: The other reason for wanting early binding to the ports is if the ports are in the reserved for root range ( 1024); in that case, the ports *must* be bound early, before dropping privileges to those of the effective user. Ah, that's true enough, but then again, anyone

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Timing the opening of network ports

2006-08-31 Thread Dieter Maurer
Chris Withers wrote at 2006-8-31 08:15 +0100: ... Er yes, I know why this is a very good thing. I was commenting that I can't see why anyone would want anything else ;-) You did not read the thread carefully: I explained why I prefer early port binding... -- Dieter

[Zope-dev] Adding INSTANCE/lib/python to PYTHONPATH

2006-08-31 Thread Sidnei da Silva
Looks like INSTANCE_HOME/lib/python is added to PYTHONPATH at some point during startup, but not on the zopectl/runzope scripts. I've tried installing eggs into INSTANCE_HOME/lib/python and they won't load unless it's added to PYTHONPATH at startup time. Thus, I propose to add

Re: [Zope-dev] Adding INSTANCE/lib/python to PYTHONPATH

2006-08-31 Thread Chris McDonough
+1 On Aug 31, 2006, at 4:46 PM, Sidnei da Silva wrote: Looks like INSTANCE_HOME/lib/python is added to PYTHONPATH at some point during startup, but not on the zopectl/runzope scripts. I've tried installing eggs into INSTANCE_HOME/lib/python and they won't load unless it's added to PYTHONPATH

[Zope-dev] Re: Adding INSTANCE/lib/python to PYTHONPATH

2006-08-31 Thread whit
Sidnei da Silva wrote: Looks like INSTANCE_HOME/lib/python is added to PYTHONPATH at some point during startup, but not on the zopectl/runzope scripts. I've tried installing eggs into INSTANCE_HOME/lib/python and they won't load unless it's added to PYTHONPATH at startup time. Thus, I propose

[Zope-dev] Re: Timing the opening of network ports

2006-08-31 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Andrew Langmead wrote: On Aug 31, 2006, at 9:41 AM, Tres Seaver wrote: The other reason for wanting early binding to the ports is if the ports are in the reserved for root range ( 1024); in that case, the ports *must* be bound early, before