> It is unlikely that the the low conflict connection causes your
> problem. "Low conflict" affects the following situation:
> You try to load an object (because it is not in your ZODB cache)
> and get informed that is has been modified (by another commited
> transaction) since your transaction started.
> With a normal ZODB connection, you will get a "ReadConflictError"
> as adding the object to your ZODB cache would make it inconsistent:
> some objects would have the state from your transactions start
> and others from a later date.
> With a low conflict connection, the inconsistency is accepted
> and no "ReadConflictError" is raised.
> As you described, you loose the session object.
> This is not easily understood as the effect of a cache inconsistency.
Sure. Disabling Low conflict hasn't solved anything.
I'm not able to find where is the problem. I have not enought knowledge
of Zope internals. I will try to store my data in persisten subobjects,
as you said.
One thing is true: Changing session object simultaniously in various
frames doesn't work fine. Sometimes session data is not the espected
becouse another frame has erased your changes in the session object.
I think this is a serious inconvenient in front of other platforms.
>From my point of view, it would be better to have SESSION out of the
transaction but with changes stored inmediatly. You don't?
Perhaps some day I will be able to implement this for myself. Until
that, do you think I should enter a bug, or this cann't be considered as
Thanks for your help
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -