Yay! Where's the correct place to report these nowadays?
cheers,
Chris
Dieter Maurer wrote:
Chris Withers wrote at 2005-11-29 14:33 +:
Hot on the heals of my posts about Shouldn't load state for comes the
eagerly awaited sequel Couldn't load state for ;-)
...
File
Sorry, I couldn't find a comprehensible question here after reasonable
effort to extract one. Clearly, Zope2's DateTime.DateTime.DateTime objects
are neither persistent nor do they define any mutating methods. Are those
relevant? If not, try to ask a question directly, without assuming everyone
[Chris Withers]
Yay! Where's the correct place to report these nowadays?
Same as always: ZODB bugs should be reported on a Zope Collector, with
topic Database.
It's fine to discuss them on zodb-dev, but when (as appears to be the case
with this one) nobody has an immediate answer or time to
[Jürgen Herrmann]
the question was wether DateTime instances (of the new implementation,
which is yet to be coded) should mixin Persistent.
OK. Since ZODB doesn't care whether you do, is there confusion about what
ZODB may or may not do in either case? That is, what's the ZODB issue here?
Tim Peters wrote:
Sorry, I couldn't find a comprehensible question here after reasonable
effort to extract one. Clearly, Zope2's DateTime.DateTime.DateTime objects
are neither persistent nor do they define any mutating methods. Are those
relevant? If not, try to ask a question directly,
On Dec 1, 2005, at 11:38 AM, Tim Peters wrote:
... I know Gary Poster gave a lot of thought to making pickles for
the timezone info in Zope3 efficient too.
For some definition of a lot of thought. :-) The pickle for
pytz.utc is now relatively small (though still adds a non-trivial
On Dec 1, 2005, at 11:39 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Sorry, my question was that if DateTime's were persistent, would
the following code result in a complete pickle for 'a' being
written on the second transaction commit?
a.someTime = DateTime()
get_transaction().commit()
wait/do
[Chris Withers]
Sorry, my question was that if DateTime's were persistent, would the
following code result in a complete pickle for 'a' being written on the
second transaction commit?
There is only one commit in the following, so I'll assume you intended a
second commit at the end:
[Gary Poster]
For some definition of a lot of thought. :-) The pickle for pytz.utc
is now relatively small (though still adds a non-trivial percentage
addition--30%ish?--to a naive datetime IIRC). That's as far as that bit
goes.
A naïve datetime has an extraordinarily small state, though,
On Dec 1, 2005, at 12:04 PM, Tim Peters wrote:
Note that we have yet to use a new strategy for shrinking pickle
sizes: a
few years ago Python's pickle code grew support for extension
codes, a
registry of class/type names that _can_ be referenced by short (as
short as
2 bytes) new pickle
...
...have we just committed a pickle containing all of 'a'?...
If `a` is persistent, yes.
If not?
Then get_transaction().commit() presumably doesn't do much of anything,
since no persistent object was changed. It's like asking what this does:
i = 2+3
get_transaction().commit()
[Gary Poster, on pickle extension codes]
Yes, I remembered this, and just refreshed my memory. This is the last
mention I see in the archives as to ZODB use of protocol 2 (i.e., it
doesn't, and prior to Py 2.3.4 it couldn't).
http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zodb-dev/2004-December/008259.html
12 matches
Mail list logo
