- 17 Mar, 2022 6 commits
-
-
Jens Vagelpohl authored
-
Jens Vagelpohl authored
-
Jens Vagelpohl authored
-
Jens Vagelpohl authored
-
Jens Vagelpohl authored
-
Jens Vagelpohl authored
-
- 09 Nov, 2021 2 commits
-
-
Michael Howitz authored
-
Michael Howitz authored
* Config with pure python * Lint the code. * Add support for Python 3.9 and 3.10.
-
- 05 Nov, 2021 2 commits
-
-
Michael Howitz authored
-
Michael Howitz authored
-
- 29 Oct, 2021 2 commits
-
-
Michael Howitz authored
Add support for Python 3.9 and 3.10.
-
Michael Howitz authored
-
- 28 Oct, 2021 1 commit
-
-
Alessandro Pisa authored
Fix `TypeError: can't concat str to bytes` when running fsoids.py script with Python 3. Closes #350
-
- 27 Oct, 2021 1 commit
-
-
Michael Howitz authored
-
- 06 Oct, 2021 1 commit
-
-
Dieter Maurer authored
fsdump/fsstats improvements
-
- 05 Oct, 2021 3 commits
- 03 Oct, 2021 1 commit
-
-
dieter authored
-
- 03 May, 2021 1 commit
-
-
Jens Vagelpohl authored
Define the official expansion of "ZODB"
-
- 23 Apr, 2021 4 commits
-
-
Jens Vagelpohl authored
Switch from Travis CI to GitHub Actions for testing
-
Jens Vagelpohl authored
-
Jens Vagelpohl authored
-
Jens Vagelpohl authored
-
- 21 Apr, 2021 3 commits
-
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
As suggested by @d-maurer: https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZODB/pull/345#issuecomment-822188305 https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZEO/issues/168#issuecomment-821829116 /reviewed-on https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZODB/pull/345
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
For ZEO this data corruption bug was reported at https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZEO/issues/155 and fixed at https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZEO/pull/169. Without that fix the failure shows e.g. as follows when running ZEO test suite: Failure in test check_race_load_vs_external_invalidate (ZEO.tests.testZEO.BlobAdaptedFileStorageTests) Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/lib/python2.7/unittest/case.py", line 329, in run testMethod() File "/home/kirr/src/wendelin/z/ZODB/src/ZODB/tests/BasicStorage.py", line 621, in check_race_load_vs_external_invalidate self.fail([_ for _ in failure if _]) File "/usr/lib/python2.7/unittest/case.py", line 410, in fail raise self.failureException(msg) AssertionError: ['T1: obj1.value (7) != obj2.value (8)'] Even if added test is somewhat similar to check_race_loadopen_vs_local_invalidate, it is added anew without trying to unify code. The reason here is that the probability to catch load vs external invalidation race is significantly reduced when there are only 1 modify and 1 verify workers. The unification with preserving both tests semantic would make test for "load vs local invalidate" harder to follow. Sometimes a little copying is better than trying to unify too much. For the test to work, test infrastructure is amended with ._new_storage_client() method that complements ._storage attribute: client-server storages like ZEO, NEO and RelStorage allow several storage clients to be connected to single storage server. For client-server storages test subclasses should implement _new_storage_client to return new storage client that is connected to the same storage server self._storage is connected to. For ZEO ._new_storage_client() is added by https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZEO/pull/170 Other client-server storages can follow to implement ._new_storage_client() and this way automatically activate this "load vs external invalidation" test when their testsuite is run. Contrary to test for "load vs local invalidate" N is set to lower value (100), because with 8 workers the bug is usually reproduced at not-so-high iteration number (5-10-20). /cc @d-maurer, @jamadden, @jmuchemb /reviewed-on https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZODB/pull/345
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
Add test that exercises open vs invalidation race condition that, if happen, leads to data corruption. We are seeing such race happening on storage level in ZEO (https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZEO/issues/166), and previously we've seen it also to happen on Connection level (https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZODB/issues/290). By adding this test to be exercised wrt all storages we make sure that all storages stay free from this race. And it payed out. Besides catching original problems from https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZODB/issues/290 and https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZEO/issues/166 , this test also discovered a concurrency bug in MVCCMappingStorage: Failure in test check_race_open_vs_invalidate (ZODB.tests.testMVCCMappingStorage.MVCCMappingStorageTests) Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/lib/python2.7/unittest/case.py", line 329, in run testMethod() File "/home/kirr/src/wendelin/z/ZODB/src/ZODB/tests/BasicStorage.py", line 492, in check_race_open_vs_invalidate self.fail(failure[0]) File "/usr/lib/python2.7/unittest/case.py", line 410, in fail raise self.failureException(msg) AssertionError: T1: obj1.value (24) != obj2.value (23) The problem with MVCCMappingStorage was that instance.poll_invalidations was correctly taking main_lock with intention to make sure main data is not mutated during analysis, but instance.tpc_finish and instance.tpc_abort did _not_ taken main lock, which was leading to committed data to be propagating into main storage in non-atomic way. This bug was also observable if both obj1 and obj2 in the added test were always loaded from the storage (added obj2._p_invalidate after obj1._p_invalidate). -> Fix MVCCMappingStorage by correctly locking main MVCCMappingStorage instance when processing transaction completion. /cc @d-maurer, @jamadden, @jmuchemb /reviewed-on https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZODB/pull/345
-
- 20 Apr, 2021 5 commits
-
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
buildout: Fix CI /reviewed-on https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZODB/pull/346 /reviewed-by @d-maurer
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
Commit 75c703fc (Security fix documentation dependencies (#342)) changed requirements for pygments from # pygments 2.6 stops the support for python2 pygments<2.6 to # Silence dependabot claiming a security issue in older versions: pygments >= 2.7.4 However this broke CI for python2, as sphinx now fails to install: Collecting Sphinx Using cached Sphinx-1.8.5-py2.py3-none-any.whl (3.1 MB) ERROR: Could not find a version that satisfies the requirement pygments>=2.7.4 (from -r doc/requirements.txt (line 3)) (from versions: 0.5, 0.5.1, 0.6, 0.7, 0.7.1, 0.8, 0.8.1, 0.9, 0.10, 0.11, 0.11.1, 1.0, 1.1, 1.1.1, 1.2, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.3, 1.3.1, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6rc1, 1.6, 2.0rc1, 2.0, 2.0.1, 2.0.2, 2.1, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.3, 2.2.0, 2.3.0, 2.3.1, 2.4.0, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 2.5.1, 2.5.2) ERROR: No matching distribution found for pygments>=2.7.4 (from -r doc/requirements.txt (line 3)) The command "if [[ $TRAVIS_PYTHON_VERSION != pypy3* ]]; then pip install --upgrade --requirement doc/requirements.txt; fi" exited with 1. (see e.g. https://travis-ci.com/github/zopefoundation/ZODB/jobs/499836548) Try to fix that by bringing back requirement for `pygments < 2.6` on python2.
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
It is not only py2 as build on py3 is also affected, e.g. https://travis-ci.com/github/zopefoundation/ZODB/jobs/499826281 And even though Sphinx is going to be ready for newer docutils, sphinx_rtd_theme requires docutils<0.17 for now: https://github.com/readthedocs/sphinx_rtd_theme/blob/2026bb61ddf85a672141127b162d6f9181603725/setup.py#L119-L122
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
Else it is failing as: Got j1m.sphinxautozconfig 0.1.0. Getting distribution for 'sphinx_rtd_theme'. Got sphinx-rtd-theme 0.5.2. Version and requirements information containing docutils: Base installation request: 'Sphinx', 'docutils', 'ZODB', 'sphinxcontrib_zopeext', 'j1m.sphinxautozconfig', 'sphinx_rtd_theme' Requirement of sphinx_rtd_theme: docutils<0.17 Requirement of j1m.sphinxautozconfig: docutils Requirement of Sphinx: docutils<0.17,>=0.12 While: Installing sphinx. Error: There is a version conflict. We already have: docutils 0.17.1 but sphinx-rtd-theme 0.5.2 requires 'docutils<0.17'. (see e.g. https://travis-ci.com/github/zopefoundation/ZODB/jobs/499760337) Suggested by @d-maurer.
-
- 01 Apr, 2021 1 commit
-
-
Claudius Ellsel authored
Fix tiny issue with a remaining colon that was probably not deleted during updates of the README.
-
- 31 Mar, 2021 1 commit
-
-
Michael Howitz authored
According to dependabot Pygment versions < 2.7.4 are vulnerable. Updating to this version even though it should not be a problem with our static documentation.
-
- 29 Mar, 2021 2 commits
-
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
Commit fc4c86e6 (Fix unbound local error when using the fsoids.py script (#295)) wanted to refer to "issue 285", but put it as "issue 268" into visible text.
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
* fsrefs: Optimize IO (take 2) Access objects in the order of their position in file instead of in the order of their OID. This should give dramatical speedup when data are on HDD. For example @perrinjerome reports that on a 73Go database it takes almost 8h to run fsrefs (where on the same database, fstest takes 15 minutes) [1,2]. After the patch fsrefs took ~80 minutes to run on the same database. In other words this is ~ 6x improvement. Fsrefs has no tests. I tested it only lightly via generating a bit corrupt database with deleted referred object(*), and it gives the same output as unmodified fsrefs. oid 0x0 __main__.Object last updated: 1979-01-03 21:00:42.900001, tid=0x285cbacb70a3db3 refers to invalid objects: oid 0x07 missing: '<unknown>' oid 0x07 object creation was undone: '<unknown>' This "take 2" version is derived from https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZODB/pull/338 and only iterates objects in the order of their in-file position without building complete references graph in-RAM, because that in-RAM graph would consume ~12GB of memory. Added pos2oid in-RAM index also consumes memory: for the 73GB database in question fs._index takes ~700MB, while pos2oid takes ~2GB. In theory it could be less, because we need only array of oid sorted by key(oid)=fs._index[oid]. However array.array does not support sorting, and if we use plain list to keep just []oid, the memory consumption just for that list is ~5GB. Also because list.sort(key=...) internally allocates memory for key array (and list.sort(cmp=...) was removed from Python3), total memory consumption just to produce list of []oid ordered by pos is ~10GB. So without delving into C/Cython and/or manually sorting the array in Python (= slow), using QQBTree seems to be the best out-of-the-box option for oid-by-pos index. [1] nexedi/zodbtools!19 (comment 129480) [2] nexedi/zodbtools!19 (comment 129551) (*) test database generated via a bit modified gen_testdata.py from zodbtools: https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/zodbtools/blob/v0.0.0.dev8-28-g129afa6/zodbtools/test/gen_testdata.py + ```diff --- a/zodbtools/test/gen_testdata.py +++ b/zodbtools/test/gen_testdata.py @@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ def ext(subj): return {} # delete an object name = random.choice(list(root.keys())) obj = root[name] - root[name] = Object("%s%i*" % (name, i)) +# root[name] = Object("%s%i*" % (name, i)) # NOTE user/ext are kept empty on purpose - to also test this case commit(u"", u"predelete %s" % unpack64(obj._p_oid), {}) ``` /cc @tim-one, @jeremyhylton, @jamadden /reviewed-by @jamadden, @perrinjerome /reviewed-on https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZODB/pull/340
-
- 19 Feb, 2021 1 commit
-
-
Michael Howitz authored
to trigger the new web hook.
-
- 28 Oct, 2020 2 commits
-
-
Jens Vagelpohl authored
Update badge URL for Travis
-
Jürgen Gmach authored
Committed via https://github.com/asottile/all-repos
-
- 23 Sep, 2020 1 commit
-
-
Philip Bauer authored
Co-authored-by: ale-rt <alessandro.pisa@gmail.com>
-