Re: Announcing Newt DB, the amphibious database

On 2/23/17 5:55 AM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:46 AM, Jason Madden 
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> 
> wrote:
>
>
>     > On Feb 23, 2017, at 07:37, Mike Metcalfe <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>     >
>     > I'm trying to create a local instance with RelStorage but
>     getting version/pinning issues when running buildout in a plone
>     4.3.10 instance. So far I've pinned:
>     > transaction = 2.1.0
>     > relstorage = 2.1a1
>     >
>     > With these pins the buildout completes successfully but now I
>     cannot start the client, I get:
>     >   File
>     "/home/mike/instances/sqltlm/buildout-cache/eggs/RelStorage-2.1a1-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg/relstorage/_compat.py",
>     line 82, in <module>
>     >     from ZODB._compat import BytesIO
>     > ImportError: No module named _compat
>     >
>     > I'll keep going but do you (or anyone else) have a KGV dev
>     buildout for plone 4.3.x?
>
>     Plone 4.x requires ZODB3 and hence RelStorage 1.6. Initially this
>     was due to changes in BTrees 4, but that reason is no longer
>     applicable. It *may* be possible to get Plone 4.x to work with
>     ZODB 5 and RelStorage 2, but you'd be in uncharted waters. The
>     official work to make that happen is going on in Plone 6:
>     https://www.starzel.de/blog/towards-plone-6
>     <https://www.starzel.de/blog/towards-plone-6>
>
>
> Oh man, I keep forgetting about this, because... ZODB3. Really?  I 
> gather ZODB3 is what debian distributes as well.
>
> Of course, I get that this may be due to the BTree issue.  I'm 
> disappointed that this wasn't escalated years ago.  (It may have been 
> and I didn't appreciate it, but this is a major issue, people should 
> have pushed this.)
>
> So when I say newt works with Plone, I'm wrong because of this issue. 
> whimper.
>
> It would be really great of current stable plone used current stable 
> ZODB and RelStorage. I wonder what that would take.

Yeah, I think we got hung up on the None-in-BTree issue, and 
misunderstanding that that was a limitation forced by supporting Python 
3 rather than just a policy choice which we could push for changing.

Plone 6 will support latest stable ZODB; it already does on the Zope 4 
compatibility branch which has all tests passing.

Supporting ZODB 5 in Plone 5 would require a new Zope 2.13.x release 
that handles transaction notes as unicode when transaction 2.x is 
present but as bytes when transaction 1.x is present (for 
backwards-compatibility within the minor release). Or a way to tell 
transaction which sort of string to use in its note interface.

David

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "zodb" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.