Chris McDonough wrote at 2004-5-15 13:04 -0400:
...
Dieter, do you think you can read this patch and give a thumbs up or
down on it?
The patch looks good.
On a different subject, the publisher probably shouldn't pass around
traceback objects (e.g. when it calls into err_hook) as Tres believes
On Mon, 2004-05-17 at 13:00, Dieter Maurer wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote at 2004-5-15 13:04 -0400:
...
Dieter, do you think you can read this patch and give a thumbs up or
down on it?
The patch looks good.
Great, thanks for looking at it.
- C
On Fri, 2004-05-14 at 22:49, Michael Dunstan wrote:
hmm... I suspect there are few holes in this...
- Need to make sure there is no get_transaction().begin() in
zpublisher_exception_hook() of lib/python/Zope/App/startup.py
That begin() would mean that the error handling is not in
On 14/05/2004, at 10:06 AM, Chris McDonough wrote:
I am tempted to check the following into the 2.7 branch and HEAD:
- error occurs in same transaction as main request patch
to Publish.py. See
http://www.plope.com/Members/chrism/
publishpy_errorinmaintrainsaction.patch/file_view
for the
On Wed, 2004-05-12 at 22:54, Michael Dunstan wrote:
On 11/05/2004, at 4:54 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
On Mon, 2004-04-26 at 18:34, Michael Dunstan wrote:
I removed all the above hacks leaving just the
one that comments out the construction of the to_notify list. Reran
the
test rig.
Largely due to Michael I believe I have isolated and fixed every
reported sessioning error except this
(still-difficult-to-reproduce-but-definitely-still-existing) KeyError
bug in temporary storage. I can let the test rig run for several hours;
it happens maybe once every hour or two, so I've not
On 11/05/2004, at 4:54 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
On Mon, 2004-04-26 at 18:34, Michael Dunstan wrote:
I removed all the above hacks leaving just the
one that comments out the construction of the to_notify list. Reran
the
test rig. And have yet to see any KeyErrors.
Have you seen any since the
Hi Chris,
Chris McDonough wrote at 2004-5-11 00:54 -0400:
...
So what do folks think of this error-case transaction isolation patch?
Michael's original patch is preserved here (although it didn't survive
cut and paste from my mail client in a pristine way, you'll get the
idea):
On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 13:04, Dieter Maurer wrote:
Hi Chris,
Chris McDonough wrote at 2004-5-11 00:54 -0400:
...
So what do folks think of this error-case transaction isolation patch?
Michael's original patch is preserved here (although it didn't survive
cut and paste from my mail client
Whew. I finally got a chance to review at least a bit of Michael's
excellent work...
On Mon, 2004-04-26 at 18:34, Michael Dunstan wrote:
Okay - I've gone ahead and implemented a flavour of transaction
isolation for errors. (See below for patch.) That seems to have done
the trick just
On 11/03/2004, at 7:25 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 23:14, michael wrote:
Thanks for your excellent isolation here.
I don't get a KeyError thrown until *after* at least one rendering of
standard_error_message that includes an access to a session variable.
And I'm only
On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 06:52, Chris Withers wrote:
Well, what if you want to make a note in some object (say the error_log), that
something bad happened?
The error_log doesn't use persistent objects to keep its messages.
What if you want to make a change in the error handler?
If anyone had
On Thursday 11 March 2004 12:19, Chris McDonough wrote:
What if you want to make a change in the error handler?
If anyone had been depending on this behavior in their current error
handlers, they would have seen weirdnesses in their applications like
those being reported now.
I have
Hi Chris,
On Tue, 9 Mar 2004, Chris McDonough wrote:
But it seems I forget to install new Transience module to the new Zope
instance. Should I?
Yes, please!
Sorry, it does not seems to work on my first attempt:
Traceback (innermost last):
* Module ZPublisher.Publish, line 163, in
On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 08:32, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Chris,
On Tue, 9 Mar 2004, Chris McDonough wrote:
But it seems I forget to install new Transience module to the new Zope
instance. Should I?
Yes, please!
Sorry, it does not seems to work on my first attempt:
Right. Could
On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 07:29, Toby Dickenson wrote:
I have applications that send emails in error handlers. MailHost isnt
transactional today, but Ive always wanted it to be.
I suppose that's true. If someone else doesn't do it first, during the
bug day we'll try to support this use case,
michael wrote at 2004-3-10 15:22 +1300:
...
I have been trying on and off to recreate this error via brute force
loading of the simplest possible site that uses sessions. I failed to
see this particular KeyError *until* I tried reading a session variable
from standard_error_message. Now I can
On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 15:20, Dieter Maurer wrote:
michael wrote at 2004-3-10 15:22 +1300:
...
I have been trying on and off to recreate this error via brute force
loading of the simplest possible site that uses sessions. I failed to
see this particular KeyError *until* I tried reading a
Nevermind. http://zope.org/Collectors/Zope/789 and
http://zope.org/Collectors/Zope/786
The bug neglector is really living up to its name lately (not pointing
fingers, mea culpa).
- C
On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 15:20, Dieter Maurer wrote:
michael wrote at 2004-3-10 15:22 +1300:
...
I have been
On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 23:14, michael wrote:
Thanks for your excellent isolation here.
I don't get a KeyError thrown until *after* at least one rendering of
standard_error_message that includes an access to a session variable.
And I'm only getting KeyError's for sessions that have had a
On 11/03/2004, at 7:25 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 23:14, michael wrote:
Thanks for your excellent isolation here.
I don't get a KeyError thrown until *after* at least one rendering of
standard_error_message that includes an access to a session variable.
And I'm only
Hi Chris,
On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 13:08:01 -0500, Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I am monitoring site now, and will tell you about the results.
OK, many thanks!
Running For: 3 days 4 hours 28 min 29 sec.
I have enabled 400 error_log ex exceptions to keep, and during 3 days I
got 2
On 10/03/2004, at 6:29 AM, Chris McDonough wrote:
On Tue, 2004-03-09 at 06:36, Alex V. Koval wrote:
I have enabled 400 error_log ex exceptions to keep, and during 3 days
I
got 2 errors
on the site:
TimeUsername (User Id) Exception
16:35:01Anonymous User (None)
Hi Chris,
On Wed, 3 Mar 2004, Chris McDonough wrote:
(boldly crossposting this to zodb-dev, please respond on one list or the
other but not both)
That error *appears* to be caused by reaching a state that is impossible
to reach. The code in question is:
for key in
Hi Chris,
On Wed, 3 Mar 2004, Chris McDonough wrote:
With this text:
zodb_db temporary
# Temporary storage database (for sessions)
filestorage
path $INSTANCE/var/Sessions.fs
/filestorage
mount-point /temp_folder
container-class
On Fri, 2004-03-05 at 09:15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Installed. I had to install new zope instance first, then import
old content via zexp recreate manually all admins. Because when you
change the running zope config in Zope 2.7.0 it has no impact on
temp_folder - Sessions.fs is not
Chris McDonough wrote:
On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 22:20, Casey Duncan wrote:
for key in list(self._data.keys(None, max_ts)):
assert(key = max_ts)
STRICT and _assert(self._data.has_key(key))
for v in self._data[key].values():
to_notify.append(v)
On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 22:53, John Belmonte wrote:
If I'm following this thread correctly, isn't the code failing because
the BTree is corrupted (that is, BTrees.check.check chokes)? If that's
the case then you're certainly right to avoid masking the problem.
We don't know that it's
Chris,
No, just a few minutes ago I got this again:
Time2004/03/03 07:45:04.662 GMT
User Name (User Id) Anonymous User (None)
Request URL http://www.chalkface.com/catalog/html/custom/index_html
Exception Type KeyError
Exception Value 1078236460
Traceback (innermost last):
(boldly crossposting this to zodb-dev, please respond on one list or the
other but not both)
That error *appears* to be caused by reaching a state that is impossible
to reach. The code in question is:
for key in list(self._data.keys(None, max_ts)):
assert(key = max_ts)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Module Products.Transience.Transience, line 419, in _gc
KeyError: 1078236460
(on the other Chris's behalf)
wagh!
Chris ;-)
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting
- http://www.simplistix.co.uk
On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 04:55, Chris McDonough wrote:
(boldly crossposting this to zodb-dev, please respond on one list or the
other but not both)
That error *appears* to be caused by reaching a state that is impossible
to reach. The code in question is:
for key in
Chris McDonough wrote at 2004-3-3 04:55 -0500:
(boldly crossposting this to zodb-dev, please respond on one list or the
other but not both)
That error *appears* to be caused by reaching a state that is impossible
to reach. The code in question is:
for key in list(self._data.keys(None,
On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 22:20, Casey Duncan wrote:
for key in list(self._data.keys(None, max_ts)):
assert(key = max_ts)
STRICT and _assert(self._data.has_key(key))
for v in self._data[key].values():
to_notify.append(v)
Great, I'm going to consider that a resounding endorsement and check it
in soon; please do let me know if you see anything odd come up.
If anyone else has been having issues with the old Transience module,
and would like to provide feedback on the newer implementation, please
get this file:
Chris McDonough wrote:
That is very critital and 'blocker' bug for Zope. I do not understand how
people could use Zope on a sites with high load..
They don't use sessions under high load.
Or they don't use the standard session machinery. We use my SQLSession
stuff, and it's fine under load.
--
I installed new Transience.py. During my little test it works fine.
But real test will be on Monday when students start logging in as complete
classes, sometimes there are hundreds of them logging on simultaneously,
so we will see.
Any news? ;-)
Chris,
I'm not sure if you'd even planned to, but have you looked over this
replacement Transience.py? Do you have an opinion on the
re-implementation? I plan on looking over it myself, but even if I like
it, I'd sleep better while it runs on my customer's servers if I knew it
had your
Well, I was also shamed into creating a new implementation of the
sessioning stuff that might work better under higher load.
The people that are now having problems should try to replace the file
in their Zope software home named
lib/python/Products/Transience/Transience.py with this one:
Hi Chris,
Well, I was also shamed into creating a new implementation of the
sessioning stuff that might work better under higher load.
Thank you very much for a fast fix/replacement of Transience :)
The people that are now having problems should try to replace the file
in their Zope
Hi
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Chris McDonough wrote:
Yes, it's still broke. No, there is no fix. Sorry.
Thanks Cris. Thats very bad. It is very bad from end-user perspective that
such critical bug has been found more then year ago, and nobody at Zope
has fixed their code during a year time.
I
Hi
As far I understand the error happends in this code
Question to Python developers:
As far I understand, index does contain b, and
data does not contain 'b'.
Simple question: why does the line:
v = self._data[b].get(k, notfound)
throw KeyError at any case? get does have next argument,
On Sat, 2004-02-28 at 04:07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Chris McDonough wrote:
Yes, it's still broke. No, there is no fix. Sorry.
Thanks Cris. Thats very bad.
Yes it is.
It is very bad from end-user perspective that
such critical bug has been found more then
On Sat, 2004-02-28 at 04:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
As far I understand the error happends in this code
Question to Python developers:
As far I understand, index does contain b, and
data does not contain 'b'.
Simple question: why does the line:
v = self._data[b].get(k,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote at 2004-2-28 11:07 +0200:
...
Yes, it's still broke. No, there is no fix. Sorry.
Thanks Cris. Thats very bad. It is very bad from end-user perspective that
such critical bug has been found more then year ago, and nobody at Zope
has fixed their code during a year time.
On Sat, 2004-02-28 at 16:32, Dieter Maurer wrote:
When we started using Zope sessions, we experienced a set
of session problems. I started fixing them, but it turned out
that the implementation was very ambitious, too ambitious to
get it safe.
You're very kind to put it that way. ;-)
I,
When we started using Zope sessions, we experienced a set
of session problems. I started fixing them, but it turned out
that the implementation was very ambitious, too ambitious to
get it safe. I, therefore, switched plans and implemented
an alternative Transience module -- much simpler and
47 matches
Mail list logo
