t/zvpp_72childhandles not ok (Re: Problem upgrading DBI using CPAN (module test suite fails))

2006-09-18 Thread Tim Bunce
On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 06:28:37PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I'm having troubles trying to upgrade the DBI module in Perl. When I do the following (as root): /usr/bin/perl -MCPAN -e 'install DBI' it downloads the new module, builds everything, and then starts running the make

Re: Safely timing out DBI queries

2006-09-18 Thread Tim Bunce
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 10:59:48AM -0700, Dean Arnold wrote: (I've added dbi-dev as this seems relevant) Tim Bunce wrote: On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 08:31:54PM -0400, Sam Tregar wrote: On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Dean Arnold wrote: I think your best bet might be to work with the DBD::mysql

Fwd: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)

2006-09-18 Thread srilata devineni
-- Forwarded message -- From: Mail Delivery Subsystem [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sep 18, 2006 2:34 PM Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification Delivery to the following recipient failed

Re: Safely timing out DBI queries

2006-09-18 Thread Dean Arnold
Tim Bunce wrote: Which brings me back to the notion of non-blocking requests. Assuming many/most client libs do support an async capability, and a OOB cancel, then it should be possible to standardize the behavior externally. Attempting to standardize, let alone implement, non-blocking

Re: Safely timing out DBI queries

2006-09-18 Thread Tyler MacDonald
Dean Arnold [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Which brings me back to the notion of non-blocking requests. Assuming many/most client libs do support an async capability, and a OOB cancel, then it should be possible to standardize the behavior externally. Attempting to standardize, let alone

Re: Safely timing out DBI queries

2006-09-18 Thread Henri Asseily
On Sep 18, 2006, at 6:18 PM, Tyler MacDonald wrote: Dean Arnold [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Which brings me back to the notion of non-blocking requests. Assuming many/most client libs do support an async capability, and a OOB cancel, then it should be possible to standardize the behavior

Re: Safely timing out DBI queries

2006-09-18 Thread Tyler MacDonald
Henri Asseily [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem is not to know when a request is done processing. The problem is killing requests that are processing for too long. If you want kill them safely, you may not be able to kill them until they're done, which defeats the purpose. If you kill

PrintError won't turn off

2006-09-18 Thread Sam Tregar
Just finished a rather irritating debugging session trying to track down a warning triggered by DBIx::Timeout. Turns out this code doesn't exactly do what I mean: $dbh-{PrintError} = 0; Looks like it turns PrintError off, huh? Actually, as far as I can tell it turns it on. The relevent C

Re: PrintError won't turn off

2006-09-18 Thread Sam Tregar
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Sam Tregar wrote: Looks like it turns PrintError off, huh? Actually, as far as I can tell it turns it on. The relevent C code is (from dbih_set_attr_k): else if (strEQ(key, PrintError)) { DBIc_set(imp_xxh,DBIcf_PrintError, on); Sheesh, ignore me. I see that's

Re: PrintError won't turn off

2006-09-18 Thread Sam Tregar
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Sam Tregar wrote: On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Sam Tregar wrote: Looks like it turns PrintError off, huh? Actually, as far as I can tell it turns it on. The relevent C code is (from dbih_set_attr_k): else if (strEQ(key, PrintError)) { DBIc_set(imp_xxh,DBIcf_PrintError,

Re: PrintError won't turn off

2006-09-18 Thread Tim Bunce
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 05:05:52PM -0400, Sam Tregar wrote: On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Sam Tregar wrote: On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Sam Tregar wrote: Looks like it turns PrintError off, huh? Actually, as far as I can tell it turns it on. The relevent C code is (from dbih_set_attr_k): else if

Re: PrintError won't turn off

2006-09-18 Thread Sam Tregar
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Tim Bunce wrote: Yes, and the same applies to AutoCommit. Whether it's a good thing or not is debatable but it's been that way forever. The 'workaround' is to explicitly state the attributes you want. Hmmm, interesting. What would you think about making PrintError