July 2005 - Zope - Zope lists

Re: performance of textindexng2 vs. zctextindex
by Francis Kelly 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

Thanks for your response, Andreas, and thanks for writing TXNG in the first place. I really appreciate the contribution. >>> I recently installed TextIndexNG2 2.1.1 >> >> > >which is *pretty old*. Take a look at the v 2.2.0 which has been optimized >over the time in different ways. Consider using StupidStorage as documented >in the release notes. > > > Question re v 2.2.0: on this page http://www.zope.org/Members/ajung/TextIndexNG there are three possibilities 2.2.0, 2.2.0b1, 2.2.0b2. The last modified column indicates that 2.2.0 has been modified most recently, but I'm assuming that the b1 & b2 versions are in fact more recent. Is that true? Also, 2.2.0b1 is around 2MB, whereas the other two are 600K and I noticed after downloading 2.2.0 that stemming support seems absent. So, from all this I'm assuming that if I want stemming support I should grab the 2MB 2.2.0b1. Is that right? I'll look into StupidStorage. >>> >>> I've been struck that if the number of search hits is high, TextIndexNG2 >>> is much slower than ZCTextIndex. For example, if I do a search on >>> 'podcast' (our site deals w/ podcasting) I get about 14,000 hits. >>> ZCTextIndex returns the results in about 0.1 seconds; TextIndexNG2 takes >>> 31 seconds or 300 times longer. In general, the more hits there are, the >>> bigger the difference between the two search indexes. >> >> > >Query speed depends on different things: the query, the implementation, the >operations needed to be performed during the query. Because of some >functionality TXNG needs to store much more information than ZCTextIndex. >It did this as said above sometimes in a not so efficient way (see above). >You might also look at TextIndexNG V3. > > > > V3 is appealing but we're running 2.7.6 and I'm not sure that I want the hassle of installing Five at this point. When we go to 2.8, which we'll probably due in a couple of months, V3 will be an option. Thanks for your help, Francis

2 1

More TM ideas
by Rob Page 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

Following up to my note from yesterday. ZEA *is* the official registrant (but not legitimate owner) of the Cirlce-Z-Zope (CZZ) mark in many countries in the Madrid Protocol. You can search the WIPO database for "Zope" and find it. Zope Corporation is the official registrant of the word Zope in many countries in the Madrid Protocol and our registration predates the ZEAs. Since the ZEA registration is based on the word Zope we believe that an official trademark opposition will be successful. We are also only willing to pay the fees that Zope Corporation would otherwise have had to pay to register the marks itself. This offer was made in writing last Friday. The subtle but important point is that ZEA seems to be willing to transfer the marks to the Zope Foundation not Zope Corporation. This seems to be the essence of the difference in our position. If this is inaccurate -- i.e., ZEA is willing to transfer the marks to ZC with no strings attached then we can chalk this up to some incredible communication issue and can certainly move forward! It seems that the prospect of Zope Corporation's unfair (and unprecedented) management of the marks is the real issue. So that our position and policy are clear: *** We will not use (nor allow our successors or assigns) to use the Zope trademarks in non-competitive ways. *** The challenge is to figure out how to get this in place. One idea might be to make the BoD of the Zope Foundation the arbiter of any revocation action ZC might take. This would be a contractual relationship between ZC (and its successors and assigns) and the ZF. If ZC felt that a given ZC-licensed use of the marks had become inappropriate we would move to revoke the trademark license. If the license holder was unsatisfied with the revocation they would appeal to the Zope Foundation which, on vote of a supermajority of the BoD could overrule ZC's revocation action. It is our heartfelt sense that Zope Corporation is more likely to defend (within guidelines and process) the marks than a volunteer-led Foundation. We have heard comments that suggest that the Foundation should not be in the business of enforcement. Enforcement is an active responsibility. Perhaps once (and while) ZF has full-time staff to pursue Foundation business (including TM matters) the Foundation would be the first stop for tm issues. It has been reported that ZEA's original registration of the marks was defensive and done in an effort to preclude registrations from being made by unfriendly parties. We find it simply surprising that the first mention of their registrations to us was 18 months (!) after the fact. ZEA does not represent the entire Zope community in Europe (nor do they claim to) and certainly don't represent the global Zope community. In fact, we should all recognize that the ZEA competes with non-ZEA companies on proposals. That's fine, expected and natural. However, any action on ZEA's part that was made on "behalf of the community" is inappropriate. ZC does not claim to represent the whole Zope Community either. We are asserting our ownership (and, we think) aggressive desire to manage the marks and brand in a vendor-neutral way. With respect to ZEA's ownership of the Plone trademark - I am told by two people that ZEA helped register the Plone mark as a service to the Plone Foundation and that it has been or is in the process of being transferred. Presuming this is true I stand corrected. Even this morning the WIPO database advertises ZEA as the registrant of record for the mark. Regards, Rob -- Rob Page V: 540 361 1710 Zope Corporation F: 703 995 0412

1 0

should stream iterator be used for ZODB-generated string file?
by Petri Savolainen 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

We have an application whereby multimegabyte strings, each generated from the contents of several thousands of small objects in ZODB, are downloaded from zope as a CSV files. A particular CSV file is typically downloaded once or twice a day at a maximum. The major issue is that it takes a long time for the download to start. Would it be possible to use a stream iterator (introduced in zope 2.7.1) or should we simply do chunks of REQUEST.write() ? What are the requirements for using chunked REQUEST.write - do some specific HTTP headers need to be set or does zope take care of it all? Any advice or specific pointers would be appreciated. I've googled all I could find about the stream iterators, serving blobs etc. but all the info seems to be focused on serving large filesystem-based data. I am not sure what parts of that info applies to an use case that involves reading data from ZODB, or if stream iterators make sense for the use case at all. I guess we could generate a temporary file and then serve that using a stream iterator. I understand some parts of the zope machinery could perhaps be released faster that way, but I wonder if the benefits are worth the extra step. Thanks! Petri

2 1

How to get the download window option for file widget field?
by praveen kumar nagle 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

Dear All, I have created one ARCHETYPE having few fields for FileWidget, to upload the file. Problem::In the base view page i want to get the download window option(same like when u try to download a file) while clicking on link to download those file contents *****Code which I have given in archetype for FILE****** FileField('reserveform', searchable=1, required=0, schemata='DetailedInfo3', widget=FileWidget(label='Reservation Form')) FileField('enquiry', searchable=1, required=0, schemata='DetailedInfo5', widget=FileWidget(label='Enquiry Form')) ************************ ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

4 4

Zope 3 Developer's Handbook
by Stephan Richter 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

Hello everyone, I just wanted to let you all know that the first book covering Zope 3 hit the shelves yesterday. It is called the "Zope 3 Developer's Handbook" and was published by Sams' Developer's Library. Link to Sams Web-Site: http://www.samspublishing.com/title/0672326175 Link to amazon.com: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/product-description/0672326175 There is also an online version at: http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/Zope3Book However, I did not yet have the time to transfer the editions made by Sams back to the online version. This will happen in the next months though. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training

13 20

performance of textindexng2 vs. zctextindex
by Francis Kelly 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

I recently installed TextIndexNG2 2.1.1 on a system running Zope 2.7.6 on Fedora Core 3. I've been running some comparison tests with ZCTextIndex, which is what our site currently uses. We're indexing around 50,000 objects at the moment. For TextIndexNG2, this is the configuration: Indexed attributes keywordSearchSource Default encoding utf-8 Storage StandardStorage Stemmer english Splitter: casefolding enabled Splitter: index single characters disabled Splitter: max. length of splitted words 64 Splitter: separator characters .+-_@ Default query parser PyQueryParser Autoexpansion disabled Stopwords english Normalizer European Use converters disabled Near distance Left truncation disabled I've been struck that if the number of search hits is high, TextIndexNG2 is much slower than ZCTextIndex. For example, if I do a search on 'podcast' (our site deals w/ podcasting) I get about 14,000 hits. ZCTextIndex returns the results in about 0.1 seconds; TextIndexNG2 takes 31 seconds or 300 times longer. In general, the more hits there are, the bigger the difference between the two search indexes. TextIndexNG2 is great: it has many features that we really want and perhaps the cost of those features is performance vis-a-vis ZCTextIndex. But I'm hoping that maybe I've overlooked an obvious or not-so-obvious configuration issue that will enable me to speed up TextIndexNG2. Thanks for any advice. Francis Kelly www.loomia.com

2 1

Cool monkey patch to make tracebacks more useful :-)
by Chris Withers 19 Jul '05

19 Jul '05

Hi All, Ever noticed how tracebacks from ZPT are actually quite useful when viewed through the error_log object, but totally useless when they fail, say, in a unit test? This bugged me, so I had a dig, and just discovered this cool monkey patch, to be inserted in any module that gets imported before an exception is raised: import traceback from zExceptions.ExceptionFormatter import format_exception traceback.format_exception = format_exception So now I'm mailing you lot for two reasons: 1. This makes life a lot easier when debugging failing unit tests and looking through entries in event.log that have tracebacks, so I thought I'd share it :-) 2. I wonder if there's anything bad that can happen as a result of this? If the answer to 2 is "no", then I'm gonna wrap this up into a minute product... cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk

3 7

Forcing Zope transaction commit
by David H 19 Jul '05

19 Jul '05

Hi list, At times (it seems) necessary to force a Zope transaction commit. This might occur between two zSQL calls where the second depends on the first's *SQL* transaction's availability but the first has not yet been commited because the *Zope* transaction that includes both zSQL calls has not yet been commited. I handled this with a call to an external script as below, eg . zSql1() . pyCommit() zSql2() Publish new page Here's pyCommit() # ............................................................... # Extenstion/pyCommit.py # ............................................................... from ZODB import FileStorage,DB def commit( self ): t = get_transaction() # ZODB builtin if t: t.commit() # ............................................................... Thats it. And it solved my problem. Is there a reason why this is a bad idea, all things being equal? A better way to do it, when needed? Thanks, David

4 4

errors starting zmi
by rni users 18 Jul '05

18 Jul '05

Hello members, i am trying to start ZMI thru mozilla by http://localhost:8080/manage but it says 'localhost.com could not be found.Please check the name and try again.' though i ve already started Zope in the foreground..Moreover, it displays the port as 8080.. i also tried starting zmi by http://(hostname):8080/manage but even this didnt work out What can b the problem?? Kindly Help _________________________________________________________________ Top-of-the-line jobs!. http://creative.mediaturf.net/creatives/timesjobs/hotmail_TOL.htm Log on to www.timesjobs.com and apply TODAY!

3 2

Creating Photo object from an Image object
by Thomas Adams 18 Jul '05

18 Jul '05

Hi, I have a problem with the "Photo" product. I want to create a Photo object from an existing Image object. I have a form with id and title input tags which are initialized with appropriate values from a special folder where the Image objects resides . Now I have written a PythonSript to handle the creation of a new Photo object #id1,title1 image id and tile def doAddPhoto(id1, title1): # some comments .... img = context.getObjectById(id1) # this returns the object part of object item array from context.objectItems s="ph" +str(id1) context.manage_addPhoto(id=s, file=img.data,title=title1, displays=None, precondition='', content_type='image/jpeg') (line 12) If I submit the form, an error occurs: Traceback (innermost last): Module ZPublisher.Publish, line 101, in publish Module ZPublisher.mapply, line 88, in mapply Module ZPublisher.Publish, line 39, in call_object Module Shared.DC.Scripts.Bindings, line 306, in __call__ Module Shared.DC.Scripts.Bindings, line 343, in _bindAndExec Module Products.PythonScripts.PythonScript, line 323, in _exec Module None, line 12, in doAddPhoto - <PythonScript at /www.ecommerce.de/doAddPhoto> - Line 12 AttributeError: manage_addPhoto When I try it with context.manage_addImage everything works fine. I can't figure out why the above Exception is thrown, the source code of Photo's manage_addPhoto function looks as similar as the manage_addImage function of the Image class (from which Photo is derived) and i have no clue where the pitfall is. Does anybody have an idea or a hint? Help would be appreciate. Thanks in advance Thomas Adams

2 2