Dieter Maurer wrote:
Tim Peters wrote at 2005-8-26 14:59 -0400:


      obj._p_changed = True

when obj is a ghost appears to be senseless (what could a user possibly
intend by doing this?)

I met this strange behaviour and considered it a bug.

  What I wanted to do: use a ZODB object to synchronize
  caches across a set of ZEO clients.

  The synchronization object is empty but it should get
  a new serial to indicate to other ZEO clients that
  they should flush their cache.

I would like to make it an error (raise a ValueError exception) to attempt
to set obj._p_changed to a true value when obj is a ghost.  Does anyone

It would be better than the current behaviour...

But, why not go a step further and let it behave as one would
expect: let the ZODB write the object at the next "transaction.commit()"?

I agree with Dieter, it would be more logical if doing obj._p_changed = True unghostified the object and marked it as changed.


Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France)   CTO, Director of R&D
+33 1 40 33 71 59   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:

ZODB-Dev mailing list  -

Reply via email to