On 06/14/2010 01:43 AM, Jens Vagelpohl wrote: > My question: Is there any risk associated with ignoring the failure > during packing? The latest object versions for the persistent objects in > question do not have the problematic attribute anymore, so the latest > records are "safe" and will not cause the AttributeError, anyway.
In the general case, a failure to unpickle could be caused by some temporary condition, so we can't ignore it. For example, a broken __setstate__ method could be involved. Ignoring unpickling errors could cause the pack to not discover all references and possibly delete more objects than it should. In your case, you have already determined that this specific pickle is permanently broken, so the references from it don't matter and packing is probably safe. However, can you be certain that the rest of your database is free of temporarily broken pickles? If I were you, I would add some logging to ensure the exception handler is triggered only once, pack, and then revert the ZODB code change. Shane _______________________________________________ For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki: http://www.zope.org/Wikis/ZODB/ ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zodb-dev