On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Chris Withers <ch...@simplistix.co.uk> wrote:
> On 04/11/2010 14:50, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> Actually, I think it should be used, at least for applications with
>> high availability requirements. For applications like our's (ZC's)
>> it amounts to a "don't be stupid" setting.
>> For some applications, it's better to risk inconsistency than to have
>> your application grind to a halt.  I consider it an emergency device
>> though, which is why I'd set it pretty high.
> ...except that it logs at INFO ;-)

Not on the client. That's where it actually matters!

Actually, it would be even better if it logged transaction meta
data too, so you could reason about what the transaction was doing.

> Can you raise that, or would you mind if I raised that to CRITICAL?
> (it does feel like a CRITICAL kind of thing, based on the information you've
> provided today)

+1  Feel free to do it yourself, or file a bug.  With luck, the change
will cause a test failure
and we can just modify a test, rather than write a new one.


Jim Fulton
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:

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

Reply via email to