Tim Peters wrote:
it knew about.  To support this, a persistent ZEO cache stores the
value of the largest tid the ZEO client knew about in the cache file.

Hmmm, didn't think I was using a persistent client cache here...

...well, there are .zec files in the var directory, so I guess I must be. What controls whether a persistent or temporary client cache is used?

In a perfect world, we could change it and see what tests fail.
I'm not that brave ;-)

Then shame someone else into courage ;-) I'll bet a dollar no test will fail.

Well, that's what I'm scared of ;-) I _want_ to see tests fail if this changes, otherwise it means it's all untested and even more scary...

So, Tim, how do I shame you into having the courage? would beer help? *grinz*

That's comparing a pre-MVCC ZODB to a post-MVCC ZODB,

Yeah, I know :-S

client cache has little in common between them.  The pre-MVCC ZEO
client cache did no sanity checking on the "last tid" values it saw
over time, so this particular error was impossible in Zope 2.7 -- even
if tids were so pathological that they got smaller over time, a Zope
2.7 ZEO client cache wouldn't complain about that.  A post-MVCC cache
may well complain even if nothing is wrong :-)

frying pans and fires ;-)

What do you recommend as a course of action?


Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
           - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:

ZODB-Dev mailing list  -  ZODB-Dev@zope.org

Reply via email to