April 2000 - Zope - Zope lists

Fix for DateTime.py regarding daylight saving time (was: Z2.log and Date stamps 2nd Call for answers????)
by Gregor Hoffleit 28 Apr '00

28 Apr '00

I hacked together a fix to DateTime.py for the problems wrt. daylight saving time. I still have the impression that DateTime.py is to some degree 'broken by design' and don't know how to fix this completely without big changes to the class. Still, the attached patch should fix the problems as described in the "Z2.log and Date stamps" thread and as described in two Collector bug reports (search for "daylight" and DateTime) in a backward compatible manner. To begin with, _localzone or tz is no immutable property during the life of a Zope process (the switch to daylight saving time may happen while the Zope process is running), still DateTime uses _localzone as an immutable class attribute that's calculated only once during when the class is initialized. Furthermore, the calculation of _localzone was broken: _localzone was always set to the non-daylight saving timezone, even if we were currently in daylight saving time. Problems arose when this was mixed with the variables like hour, which were relative to the daylight saving time zone. I stick with _localzone as the non-dst zone and introduce a new, immutable class attribute _localdszone for the dst zone. Now the idea is to decide on runtime if a localtime value is non-dst or dst. I think I found and corrected the most obvious places in the class where this problem arises. I'm quite confident that with the fix, DateTime now will always return a correct date representation. Potential problems remaining to be evaluated are that DateTime *perhaps* still sometimes returns a non-dst localtime even for dates when dst was valid in your local time zone, i.e. a correct but inappropriate result. Still, that's much better than the current incorrect results. Gregor

1 0

DTML namespace weirdness
by Andrew Snare 28 Apr '00

28 Apr '00

Hi people, I've recently noticed some weirdness with namespace lookups in various dtml contexts. In particular, I've noticed the following problems: 1) REQUEST isn't being passed through to ZSQL methods. People have commented that this is a result of the security updates introduced around the time of 2.1.5. I also note that the ZSQL documentation doesn't state REQUEST should be available, but I guess we're used to it being around. 2) The order of namespace lookups in ZSQL Methods appear to have changed. I've noticed that when referring to variables with <dtml-sqlvar variable type=string>, variable will be acquired in preference to a parameter listed for the ZSQL Method. As an example, I had a ZSQL Method within a folder called "action" that also had a listed parameter of the same name. The method did a database insertion, but instead of inserting the text passed via the "action" parameter for the method, it would appear the folder named "action" was acquired in preference, resulting in the database containing the text "<Action instance at blah>" (ok, so it wasn't really a folder but rather a Product class called Action). 3) Namespace collisions within ZSQL Methods. It would appear that using parameters with some names causes grief, possibly due to internal names. In particular naming a parameter "status" caused me grief when trying to reference it with <dtml-sqlvar status type=int>. This could be related to the previous point, with a collision occuring with the Status attribute of the RESPONSE object -- I don't know if RESPONSE is in the namespace though. 4) The order of namespace lookups in DTML methods has also changed. I'm not so sure of this one. But I think I've found that the following DTML setup won't work as expected: <dtml-in "getSQL(foo)"> <dtml-var name> <dtml-in "getSQL(bar)"> <dtml-var name> </dtml-in> </dtml-in> The innermost <dtml-var name> picks up name from the outter query, not the inner one. Again, this could be related to some changes in the way ZSQL Methods work but I found the behaviour most surprising. Is anyone else able to confirm these results, and classify them as either expected, buggy, undocumentated or whatever kinds of behaviour? :) As background, this behaviour is being observed within a Product developed under Zope 2.0.1 and these are some of the problems that have come to light after migrating to Zope 2.1.6. Regards, - Andrew

3 2

how to call dtml method from python product and pass it namespace
by Roman Milner 28 Apr '00

28 Apr '00

Hello. From inside a python product I need to call a dtml method. When I call it, that dtml method can't find anything else in the folder. So - how can I pass it _ or whatever is needs so that it can find everything else in the folder? I tried passing it _, and passing it _=self, and various other things to no avail. Thanks, ^Roman

4 3

cryptmodule.c and etcUserFolder
by Erick Mechler 28 Apr '00

28 Apr '00

In the docs for the etcUserFolder package, it says "you will need to either get the cryptmodule.c (from Python) and compile it, or copy your existing cryptmodule.so file into Zope's path." I don't (1) know how to compile this module, or (2) already have a cryptmodule.so. Could someone point me to docs on how to compile this module? Any and all help would be appreciated. Regards, Erick

2 1

RE: [Zope] Re: Unfair Linux Threads And Python Oh My
by Marcus Collins 28 Apr '00

28 Apr '00

> -----Original Message----- > From: Bill Anderson [mailto:bill@libc.org] > Sent: 27 April 2000 00:50 > To: 'zope(a)zope.org' > Subject: Re: [Zope] Re: Unfair Linux Threads And Python Oh My > > Marcus Collins wrote: <snip> > > Some observations: > > > > If I replace the call to sys.stderr.write with a simple > print, then I get a > > single asterisk. Is sys.stderr.write() perhaps buffered? > > Call it with "python -u" and it is unbuffered: > """-u : unbuffered binary stdout and stderr (also > PYTHONUNBUFFERED=x)""" Unbuffered output results in a single child and a single asterisk. Thanks to Bill and Daryl for the info -- I'll read the fine manual next time :-) -- Marcus

1 0

RESPONSE.redirect - dynamic names?
by Geoff Gardiner 28 Apr '00

28 Apr '00

Is there some reason why the insertion of a variable into a redirect might not work? Thus: <dtml-let param="'sometext'"> -- sets param <dtml-var param> -- prints param as 'sometext' <dtml-call "RESPONSE.redirect('processform?withparam=<dtml-var param>')"> -- sends the string 'withparam=' across, missing the param value The characters making up 'sometext' are valid HTML characters. Thank you, Geoff

6 6

Phil Greenspun on ACS and ZOPE
by Jerry Spicklemire 28 Apr '00

28 Apr '00

As for the link below, Dr. G points out how effectively the ACS team leveraged the ready made tools built into AOL Server, and contrasts this with incorrect references to the Zope team's decisions to "build it all themselves". PG says they built their own Web Server, but it's actually Sam Rushing's "Medusa". Similarly, PG points out that the Zope team built their own RDBMS, but it's really Aaron Watters' "Gadfly". You sort of get the idea that while Dr. G may indeed be the world's leading expert on ACS, that he hasn't a clue about the range and quality of the contributions the Python Community has made to Open Source in general. Not really surprising, but sad that so many readers may be mislead . . . >and more on ACS vs ZOPE here: http://www.photo.net/building->community/infrastructure.adp >(at the 2nd finding "ZOPE", I've not noticed this before. Did any one?) Also, in terms of numbers the DC modules plus the Zope Communities' contributions stand up quite well to the ACS listing, especially considering the Zope Project is barely 1.5 years old! >and his list of prebuilt modules of ACS here: >http://www.arsdigita.com/pages/toolkit/modules.html As for a viable alternative to Oracle, let PG himself answer that one: "The open-source purist's only realistic choice for an RDBMS is PostgreSQL, available from www.postgresql.org. In some ways, PostgreSQL has more advanced features than any commercial RDBMS. Most important, the loosely organized unpaid developers of PostgreSQL were able to convert to an Oracle-style multi-version concurrency system (see below), leaving all the rest of the commercial competition deadlocked in the dust." http://photo.net/wtr/aolserver/introduction-2.html Also see: http://lists.zope.org/pipermail/zope/2000-April/024553.html >, though the price tag of Oracle repels more, ;-) >LEE Kwan Soo. Later, Jerry S.

2 1

Tomcat vrs Zope Round One
by J. Atwood 28 Apr '00

28 Apr '00

I just set up a Jakarta Tomcat installation (for someone else!) and was able to do some quick benchmarking on two *very* similar machines and here is what I found. Zope Machine: RH 6.1, 300 MHz, 256 MB RAM, 8 GB EIDE Drive - Zope. 2.1.4 Tomcat Machine: RH 6.1, 500 MHz, 512 MB RAM, 3 x 9.1 SCSI in RAID - Jakarta Tomcat 3.1 Using AB (ApacheBench) and hitting a test JSP page that I replicated in Zope (exactly the same words, etc). Tomcat: Document Path: /test.jsp Document Length: 168 bytes Concurrency Level: 100 Time taken for tests: 5.306 seconds Complete requests: 100 Failed requests: 0 Total transferred: 57024 bytes HTML transferred: 16800 bytes Requests per second: 18.85 Transfer rate: 10.75 kb/s received Connnection Times (ms) min avg max Connect: 63 121 177 Processing: 3473 3911 5063 Total: 3536 4032 5240 Zope: Document Path: /test.html Document Length: 157 bytes Concurrency Level: 100 Time taken for tests: 2.141 seconds Complete requests: 100 Failed requests: 0 Total transferred: 36360 bytes HTML transferred: 15857 bytes Requests per second: 46.71 Transfer rate: 16.98 kb/s received Connnection Times (ms) min avg max Connect: 5 8 12 Processing: 94 1091 2117 Total: 99 1099 2129 ------ I thought... wow... so I ran it again, and again and again. Each time the Tomcat stats went down as Zope stayed constant. Now I know that this does not mean that Zope is the fastest thing on the planet but it is an interesting comparison. I mean, 2 x as fast on a machine that is half as fast. Strange but true. So much for "Java Speed" I decided to do it again.. this time with 25/1000 figuring Tomcat would build up and start really flying. Here is what I got. Tomcat: Concurrency Level: 25 Time taken for tests: 41.252 seconds Complete requests: 1000 Failed requests: 0 Total transferred: 582555 bytes HTML transferred: 177000 bytes Requests per second: 24.24 Transfer rate: 14.12 kb/s received Connnection Times (ms) min avg max Connect: 0 0 5 Processing: 183 1015 2300 Total: 183 1015 2305 Zope: Concurrency Level: 25 Time taken for tests: 19.360 seconds Complete requests: 1000 Failed requests: 0 Total transferred: 360000 bytes HTML transferred: 157000 bytes Requests per second: 51.65 Transfer rate: 18.60 kb/s received Connnection Times (ms) min avg max Connect: 0 0 2 Processing: 71 478 540 Total: 71 478 542 Yupp... better for both but Zope still was able to serve up the same content on a slower machine twice as fast. Next, I guess, would be to write some code to actually "do" something on the machine and see what it could do. Also, I should level the playing field by installing Zope on the faster machine and seeing what it can do there. Comments? J

2 1

Shutting down while packing database?
by Alexander Schonfeld 28 Apr '00

28 Apr '00

Can shutting the webbrowser while it is still packing the database screw anything up? How about killing the python process? :) Just wondering... Thanks, Alex. 1010011010 0 Digital Garage 1 Alex Schonfeld 0 alex(a)garage.co.jp - pear 1 090-4429-2323

1 0

Re: [Zope] Tomcat vrs Zope Round One
by J. Atwood 28 Apr '00

28 Apr '00

A really interesting suggestion... And so I did.. Server Software: Resin/1.1 Server Port: 8051 Document Path: /test2.jsp Document Length: 158 bytes Concurrency Level: 25 Time taken for tests: 2.798 seconds Complete requests: 1000 Failed requests: 0 Total transferred: 384000 bytes HTML transferred: 158000 bytes Requests per second: 357.40 Transfer rate: 137.24 kb/s received Connnection Times (ms) min avg max Connect: 0 0 13 Processing: 17 33 112 Total: 17 33 125 I hit it a bunch of times... tried it again and again.. I went back and tried Tomcat and got the same (old) results. Well, on the very quick and narrow Resin seems to be much faster... And so it continues... J > From: Scott Boyd <sboyd(a)futures.com> > Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 16:16:42 -0700 (PDT) > To: "J. Atwood" <Jatwood(a)bwanazulia.com> > Subject: Re: [Zope] Tomcat vrs Zope Round One > > > Do this test against Resin (www.caucho.com) another JSP engine. I'd be > interested in if that was faster, because Resin has it's own caching > abilities like Zope. > > S. > > > On Thu, 27 Apr 2000, J. Atwood wrote: > >> I just set up a Jakarta Tomcat installation (for someone else!) and was able >> to do some quick benchmarking on two *very* similar machines and here is >> what I found. >> >> Zope Machine: RH 6.1, 300 MHz, 256 MB RAM, 8 GB EIDE Drive - Zope. 2.1.4 >> >> Tomcat Machine: RH 6.1, 500 MHz, 512 MB RAM, 3 x 9.1 SCSI in RAID - Jakarta >> Tomcat 3.1 >> >> Using AB (ApacheBench) and hitting a test JSP page that I replicated in Zope >> (exactly the same words, etc). >> >> Tomcat: >> Document Path: /test.jsp >> Document Length: 168 bytes >> >> Concurrency Level: 100 >> Time taken for tests: 5.306 seconds >> Complete requests: 100 >> Failed requests: 0 >> Total transferred: 57024 bytes >> HTML transferred: 16800 bytes >> Requests per second: 18.85 >> Transfer rate: 10.75 kb/s received >> >> Connnection Times (ms) >> min avg max >> Connect: 63 121 177 >> Processing: 3473 3911 5063 >> Total: 3536 4032 5240 >> >> Zope: >> >> Document Path: /test.html >> Document Length: 157 bytes >> >> Concurrency Level: 100 >> Time taken for tests: 2.141 seconds >> Complete requests: 100 >> Failed requests: 0 >> Total transferred: 36360 bytes >> HTML transferred: 15857 bytes >> Requests per second: 46.71 >> Transfer rate: 16.98 kb/s received >> >> Connnection Times (ms) >> min avg max >> Connect: 5 8 12 >> Processing: 94 1091 2117 >> Total: 99 1099 2129 >> >> ------ >> >> I thought... wow... so I ran it again, and again and again. Each time the >> Tomcat stats went down as Zope stayed constant. >> >> Now I know that this does not mean that Zope is the fastest thing on the >> planet but it is an interesting comparison. I mean, 2 x as fast on a machine >> that is half as fast. Strange but true. So much for "Java Speed" >> >> I decided to do it again.. this time with 25/1000 figuring Tomcat would >> build up and start really flying. Here is what I got. >> >> Tomcat: >> >> Concurrency Level: 25 >> Time taken for tests: 41.252 seconds >> Complete requests: 1000 >> Failed requests: 0 >> Total transferred: 582555 bytes >> HTML transferred: 177000 bytes >> Requests per second: 24.24 >> Transfer rate: 14.12 kb/s received >> >> Connnection Times (ms) >> min avg max >> Connect: 0 0 5 >> Processing: 183 1015 2300 >> Total: 183 1015 2305 >> >> Zope: >> Concurrency Level: 25 >> Time taken for tests: 19.360 seconds >> Complete requests: 1000 >> Failed requests: 0 >> Total transferred: 360000 bytes >> HTML transferred: 157000 bytes >> Requests per second: 51.65 >> Transfer rate: 18.60 kb/s received >> >> Connnection Times (ms) >> min avg max >> Connect: 0 0 2 >> Processing: 71 478 540 >> Total: 71 478 542 >> >> >> Yupp... better for both but Zope still was able to serve up the same content >> on a slower machine twice as fast. >> >> Next, I guess, would be to write some code to actually "do" something on the >> machine and see what it could do. Also, I should level the playing field by >> installing Zope on the faster machine and seeing what it can do there. >> >> Comments? >> >> J >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Zope maillist - Zope(a)zope.org >> http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope >> ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** >> (Related lists - >> http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce >> http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ) >>

2 1