Jim Fulton wrote at 2007-12-28 10:20 -0500:
>There Berkely Database Storage supported automatic incremental packing
>without garbage collection. If someone were to revitalize that effort
>and if one was willing to do without cyclic garbage collection, then
>that storage would remove the need for the sort of disruptive pack we
>have with FileStorage now.
Why do you consider "pack" disruptive?
>Note that I'm working on a new FileStorage packer that is 2-3 times
>faster and, I believe, much less disruptive than the current packing
If you are at it: I think the lock which protects the "finish" test
is hold too long. Currently, it is just release for a very short time
and then immeadiately reacquired. It should be safe to release it
immediately after the "finish" test has failed.
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org