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?
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
- http://www.simplistix.co.uk
_______________________________________________
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
http://www.zope.org/Wikis/ZODB/
ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zodb-dev
