Dieter Maurer wrote:
You should be happy about the much more explicit information.
It may allow you to analyse your problem better.


This question has nothing to do with that problem, it just came up as a result of once again being reminded that we use timestamps as transaction ids.

For example, these timestamps precisely tell you from when
the doubled transaction entries come. It may help you to verify
that they come from a single incremental backup file.

Yes, but using timestamps also means:

- we're dependent on the system clock being accurate for no good reason

- under high load, we have to deal with the possibility of duplicate transaction ids

I'm wondering why we take on those issues rather than just use an incrementing integer sequence instead?

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

Reply via email to