I think the default behavor should be that the object is deepcopied.
On Nov 6, 12:08 am, Iceberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Nov 6, 2:42 am, mdipierro <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I found the problem.
>
> > > There is, there always was, a bug in cache.ram. It was caching the
> > > original object, not a copy, so if the object gets modified the one in
> > > cache changes too.
>
> > > This bug only showed up now.
>
> > > I fixed in trunk and I will post a web2py 1.71.3 asap.
>
> > > For now you can still use the latest web2py but edit gluon/cache.py
> > > add
> > > include copy
> > > and replace
> > > self.storage[key] = (time.time(), value)
> > > with
> > > self.storage[key] = (time.time(), copy.deepcopy(value))
>
> > > Massimo
>
> On Nov6, 2:46am, vince <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > thanks for your quick fix!
>
> > vince
>
> I met the same problem and am happy to see Vince and Massimo combine
> for a quick debug and fix. Thanks!
>
> But, do we really need a deepcopy? Or shall we just cache the original
> copy, so that the cached version is always up-to-date?
>
> Besides, what if the instance to be cached is not deepcopy-able? It
> happens in some of my apps, so the latest fix still don't work for
> me. :-/
>
> Perhaps we can add one more parameter for CacheInRam.__call__(...,
> deepcopy=True) for flexibility?
>
> Hope to hear more feedback on this. Thanks.
>
> Regards,
> Iceberg
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"web2py-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
