Hello Tim,
Monday, June 26, 2006, 11:28:51 PM, you wrote:
[snip]
> AFAIK, nobody anywhere has used this yet, outside of Python's test
> suite. It was intended to be a simple, cheap approach to cutting
> pickle bloat for apps motivated enough to set up the registry. You'll
> note that half the o
On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 05:28:51PM -0400, Tim Peters wrote:
| AFAIK, nobody anywhere has used this yet, outside of Python's test
| suite. It was intended to be a simple, cheap approach to cutting
| pickle bloat for apps motivated enough to set up the registry. You'll
| note that half the one-byte
[Dieter Maurer]
The newest pickle formats can also handle the class references
is bit more efficiently -- at least when a single transaction
modifies many objects of the same class.
[Chris Withers]
I know ZC was involved in the work to introduce these new pickle
formats, but are they actually
On 26 Jun 2006, at 21:28, Robert Gravina wrote:
def __eq__(self, other):
if isinstance(other, ):
if hasattr(other,"_p_oid") and other._p_oid != None
and (other._p_oid == self._p_oid):
return True
else:
return False
and now ca
def __eq__(self, other):
if isinstance(other, ):
if hasattr(other,"_p_oid") and other._p_oid != None
and (other._p_oid == self._p_oid):
return True
else:
return False
and now can compare objects for equality after the (Twisted
Chris Withers wrote at 2006-6-26 14:05 +0100:
>Dieter Maurer wrote:
>> The newest pickle formats can also handle the class references
>> is bit more efficiently -- at least when a single transaction
>> modifies many objects of the same class.
>
>I know ZC was involved in the work to introduce these
Chris Withers wrote at 2006-6-26 14:00 +0100:
> ...
>Ah, conflict errors, the bane of any ZODB app. Makes me wonder why other
>optimistic concurrency databases (I believe PostGres is one of these?)
>don't seem to exhibit the same problems...
"PostGres" does use looks, lots of them and for differ
Hallo Florent,
Florent Guillaume wrote at 2006-6-26 00:53 +0200:
>Dieter Maurer wrote:
>> Chris Withers wrote at 2005-12-14 16:23 +:
>>> ...
>>> File "lib/python/ZODB/Connection.py", line
>>> 788, in _setstate_noncurrent
>>> assert end is not None
>>> AssertionError
>>
>> This means tha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robert Gravina wrote:
>
> On 2006/06/27, at 3:49, Benji York wrote:
>
>> Robert Gravina wrote:
>>> I just tried loading a persisted object interactively and noticed
>>> that although the _p_oid doesn't print out as anything (and hence I
>>> always
On Jun 26, 2006, at 3:16 PM, Florent Guillaume wrote:
On 26 Jun 2006, at 21:11, Robert Gravina wrote:
On 2006/06/27, at 3:49, Benji York wrote:
Robert Gravina wrote:
I just tried loading a persisted object interactively and
noticed that although the _p_oid doesn't print out as anything
On Jun 26, 2006, at 3:11 PM, Robert Gravina wrote:
I seemed to have solved this problem. I was able to write a __eq__
function like this:
def __eq__(self, other):
if isinstance(other, ):
if hasattr(other,"_p_oid") and other._p_oid != None and
(other._p_oid == self._
On 26 Jun 2006, at 21:11, Robert Gravina wrote:
On 2006/06/27, at 3:49, Benji York wrote:
Robert Gravina wrote:
I just tried loading a persisted object interactively and
noticed that although the _p_oid doesn't print out as anything
(and hence I always thought it was empty in my debugging
On 2006/06/27, at 3:49, Benji York wrote:
Robert Gravina wrote:
I just tried loading a persisted object interactively and noticed
that although the _p_oid doesn't print out as anything (and hence
I always thought it was empty in my debugging prints), it isn't
actually None! Can anyone
Robert Gravina wrote:
I just tried loading a persisted
object interactively and noticed that although the _p_oid doesn't
print out as anything (and hence I always thought it was empty in my
debugging prints), it isn't actually None! Can anyone explain this?
(here "p" is my persisted object
On 2006/06/27, at 3:16, Florent Guillaume wrote:
Robert Gravina wrote:
I've been having trouble getting the object ID of persisted
objects in the ZODB. I have read that the _p_oid attribute is
supposed to contain this, but when I access persisted objects from
a filestore and check this va
Robert Gravina wrote:
I've been having trouble getting the object ID of persisted objects in
the ZODB. I have read that the _p_oid attribute is supposed to contain
this, but when I access persisted objects from a filestore and check
this value it always seems to be None.
Also, is there any wa
I've been having trouble getting the object ID of persisted objects
in the ZODB. I have read that the _p_oid attribute is supposed to
contain this, but when I access persisted objects from a filestore
and check this value it always seems to be None.
Also, is there any way to get an object I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Withers wrote:
> Florent Guillaume wrote:
>>
>> BTrees perform best when keys' prefixes are randomly distributed.
>> So if your application generates keys like 'foo001', 'foo002',...
>> you'll get lots of conflicts. Same for consecutive integers
Chris Withers wrote:
Florent Guillaume wrote:
I can comment, I have a big brain too: the code in the catalog uses
per-connection series of keys, so no conflicts arise.
Really? I thought they were per-thread... wasn't aware that each thread
was tied to one connection indefinitely... I thought
Florent Guillaume wrote:
I can comment, I have a big brain too: the code in the catalog uses
per-connection series of keys, so no conflicts arise.
Really? I thought they were per-thread... wasn't aware that each thread
was tied to one connection indefinitely... I thought the connections
were
Andreas Jung wrote:
BTrees perform best when keys' prefixes are randomly distributed.
So if your application generates keys like 'foo001', 'foo002',... you'll
get lots of conflicts. Same for consecutive integers in IOBTree.
Tempted to call bullshit on this, since there's code in the catalog t
On 26 Jun 2006, at 15:12, Chris Withers wrote:
Florent Guillaume wrote:
This patch didn't seem to cure our Zope 2.8 afflicted with the
"assert end is not None" problem.
Florent,
Have you actually seen any problems from these errors?
I still see them occasionally, but they never seem to have
On 26 Jun 2006, at 15:02, Chris Withers wrote:
Florent Guillaume wrote:
BTrees perform best when keys' prefixes are randomly distributed.
So if your application generates keys like 'foo001', 'foo002',...
you'll get lots of conflicts. Same for consecutive integers in
IOBTree.
Tempted to cal
--On 26. Juni 2006 14:02:20 +0100 Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Florent Guillaume wrote:
BTrees perform best when keys' prefixes are randomly distributed.
So if your application generates keys like 'foo001', 'foo002',... you'll
get lots of conflicts. Same for consecutive integer
Florent Guillaume wrote:
BTrees perform best when keys' prefixes are randomly distributed.
So if your application generates keys like 'foo001', 'foo002',... you'll
get lots of conflicts. Same for consecutive integers in IOBTree.
Tempted to call bullshit on this, since there's code in the cata
Dieter Maurer wrote:
The newest pickle formats can also handle the class references
is bit more efficiently -- at least when a single transaction
modifies many objects of the same class.
I know ZC was involved in the work to introduce these new pickle
formats, but are they actually used in ZOD
Jean Jordaan wrote:
The ZODB is actually very fast. [...]
So you're probably observing slowness in the frameworks on top of it.
I'll believe this anytime :-]
;-)
In our case, a transaction may be a workflow state change on say 50 objects.
Two or three people try a transaction like that wit
Florent Guillaume wrote:
This patch didn't seem to cure our Zope 2.8 afflicted with the "assert
end is not None" problem.
Florent,
Have you actually seen any problems from these errors?
I still see them occasionally, but they never seem to have any ill
effects, other than leaving me feeling
28 matches
Mail list logo
