Paul Winkler wrote:
I don't know what your intention is there, but fwiw, if
what you're *really* interested in is the object being
marked for deletion in the ZODB, you can use:
I'm pretty sure that only works in Zope,
so? the O.P. was about zope, and this IS the zope-dev list...
Yup, but ZODB != Z
Are these patches available anywhere?
Have you let Shane know?
Chris
Florent Guillaume wrote:
FYI:
I've fixed BTreeFolder2 to properly re-raise ConflictError in _delObject
and not swallow it during beforeDelete cleanups. This is the same fix
that was done in ObjectManager.
Florent
__
Am 26. Jan 2004, um 12:22:43 schrieb Tim Peters:
> It's actually that the number of __del__-resurrecting objects *plus* the
> number of non-ghostifiable objects in cache is larger than the cache target
> size, right?
Yes, but when you push the minimize button, the cache target size is 0.
Nonwith
> Florent Guillaume wrote:
>
> > FYI:
> >
> > I've fixed BTreeFolder2 to properly re-raise ConflictError in _delObject
> > [...]
On Tue, 2004-01-27 at 07:18, Chris Withers wrote:
> Are these patches available anywhere?
He's fixed them in CVS:
http://cvs.zope.org/Products/BTreeFolder2/BTreeF
Hi,
There's a recent entry in the 2.6 branch from fred stating:
types don't have a guaranteed truth value, so check that it
isn't None
the diff is here:
http://cvs.zope.org/Zope/lib/python/ZTUtils/Zope.py.diff?r1=1.10.6.3&r2=1.10.6.4&only_with_tag=Zope-2_6-branch
This same fix n
Leonardo Rochael Almeida wrote:
There's a recent entry in the 2.6 branch from fred stating:
types don't have a guaranteed truth value, so check that it
isn't None
the diff is here:
http://cvs.zope.org/Zope/lib/python/ZTUtils/Zope.py.diff?r1=1.10.6.3&r2=1.10.6.4&only_with_tag=Zope-
Tres Seaver writes:
> The 2.7 branch and the head are the only two other "active" branches; I
> just checked in a fix which removes the "pre-2.3 compatibility" code.
And I've simplified it. ;-) Thanks for following up on this.
-Fred
--
Fred L. Drake, Jr.
PythonLabs at Zope Corporati
On Tue, 2004-01-27 at 12:42, Tres Seaver wrote:
> [...]
> The 2.7 branch and the head are the only two other "active" branches; I
> just checked in a fix which removes the "pre-2.3 compatibility" code.
Funny, with all the talk about 2.8 including only the ZODB work and
fixes, I thought we'd have
Leonardo Rochael Almeida writes:
> Funny, with all the talk about 2.8 including only the ZODB work and
> fixes, I thought we'd have a 2.8 branch by now... :-)
Yeah, we're kind of call that the trunk for now, so we pick up the
general bug fixes as well. Too many actual (active) branches makes
f
>> It's actually that the number of __del__-resurrecting objects *plus*
>> the number of non-ghostifiable objects in cache is larger than the
>> cache target size, right?
[Mario Lorenz]
> Yes, but when you push the minimize button, the cache target size is
> 0.
That would do it .
> Nonwithstandi
Hi all -
Tres and I have been working to merge some final fixes, and
I'd like to be able to make rc2 releases for 2.6.4 and 2.7.0
tomorrow.
In the meantime, it would be helpful for anyone who runs from
the 2.6 or 2.7 branches in CVS to update and let us know if you
have any unresolved proble
On Tuesday 27 January 2004 19:08, Tim Peters wrote:
> Maybe Toby remembers which release(s) of ZODB the
> current cache implementation first appeared in
Zope 2.6
--
Toby Dickenson
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mail
> > > I've fixed BTreeFolder2 to properly re-raise ConflictError in _delObject
> > > [...]
>
> > Are these patches available anywhere?
>
> He's fixed them in CVS:
>
> http://cvs.zope.org/Products/BTreeFolder2/BTreeFolder2.py.diff?r1=1.19&r2=1.20
>
> > Have you let Shane know?
>
> Assuming Sha
On Tuesday 27 January 2004 09:39, Mario Lorenz wrote:
> Given that this property is not that widely published (in the various
> tutorials etc.), I wonder if it might be a good idea to improve that loop
> check code, and walk through the ring not more than once, using a counter,
> and not the compa
14 matches
Mail list logo
