On Feb 9, 2012, at 12:24 PM, Darryl Dixon - Winterhouse Consulting wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Marius Gedminas <mar...@gedmin.as> wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 09, 2012 at 02:26:10AM +0100, Kaweh Kazemi wrote: >>>> Thanks a lot for the investigation, Marius. That was awesome. >>>> >>>> Seems to me, I need to upgrade to Python 2.7 and be done with the >>>> problem then. :/ >>> >>> I wonder, though, if ZODB ought to use the 'noload' method of >>> cPickle.Unpickler, which is undocumented and broken on 2.6 (and gone on >>> 3.x, AFAIU). >> >> noload exists for ZODB. >> >> We ZC (DC at the time) wrote cPickle because ZODB needed a >> highly-optimized >> pickler. There are a number of decisions we made specifically with >> ZODB in mind. >> >> I don't think the Python 3 version of cPickle reflects these >> priorities. I strongly suspect >> we'll end up having our own cPickle in the long run. >> > > It would be wonderful if ZODB settled on an internal version of cPickle > that didn't use recursion so we could Pickler.dump() OFS.File objects > bigger than 32mb :-) >
Shouldn't we just update OFS.File to use blob storage? David ---------- David Glick Web Developer davidgl...@groundwire.org 206.286.1235x32 Engagement technology for social and environmental change. http://www.groundwire.org _______________________________________________ For more information about ZODB, see http://zodb.org/ ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zodb-dev
