- Zope - Zope lists

Troubles with SQL queries
by jeffr＠odeon.net 23 Mar '00

23 Mar '00

Heya folks, I've got an SQL query that looks like the following: select artists.hidden_URL,gigs.* from artists,gigs where artists.name=gigs.name and gigs.date >= "<dtml-call "REQUEST.set / ('CurrentDate',ZopeTime().Date())"> / <dtml-var "REQUEST.CurrentDate">" order by gigs.date, gigs.start_time This works fine. The '/'s indicate that a single line continues, in the ZSQL method the 'and gigs.date >= etc." part is on one line. I'd link to be able to change the values the query is ordered by based on the link used to access it. Something like the following: http://foo.bar.com/Zope/query?first=date&second=start_time Towards that end I made the above look like: select artists.hidden_URL,gigs.* from artists,gigs where artists.name=gigs.name and gigs.date >= "<dtml-call "REQUEST.set / ('CurrentDate',ZopeTime().Date())"> / <dtml-var "REQUEST.CurrentDate">" order by gigs.<dtml-sqlvar first type=string>, / gigs.<dtml-sqlvar second type=string> When I test the ZSQL method it shows the SQL used as: select artists.hidden_URL,gigs.* from artists,gigs where artists.name=gigs.name and gigs.date >= "2000/03/23" order by gigs.'date', gigs.'start_time' Note the 'date' and 'start_time'... Because of the 's the query does not work. Is there a way to not have the <dtml-sqlvar> tag return the 's to MySQL, or is there another way I should be trying to do this? Thanks for the help, Jeff Robertson

1 1

Re: [Zope] authentication & mod_rewrite troubles
by david harris 23 Mar '00

23 Mar '00

thanks for the input michel it gave me a better understanding of what was going on, BUT it still doesnt work! argh. My httpd.conf now says: " <VirtualHost www.test.net> ServerAdmin webmaster(a)www.test.net #dont need a document root for Zope # DocumentRoot "/windows/My Documents/Web sites/www.test.net" #so use a null one - not the apache default # DocumentRoot '' ServerName www.test.net ErrorLog /usr/local/httpd/cgi-bin/www.test.net_log CustomLog /usr/local/httpd/cgi-bin/www.test.net_log common #Added by David - Palmer admin #<Confidence low> # Zope configuration maps /Zope/ to the Zope.cgi CGI script #ScriptAlias /cgi-bin/ /usr/local/httpd/cgi-bin/ RewriteEngine on RewriteLog /usr/local/httpd/cgi-bin/zap_rewrite_log RewriteLogLevel 9 RewriteCond %{HTTP:Authorization} ^(.*) RewriteRule ^/Zope/(.*) /usr/local/httpd/cgi-bin/Zope.cgi/$1 [e=HTTP_CGI_AUTHORIZATION:%1,t=application/x-httpd-cgi,l] #</confidence> </VirtualHost> " the rewrite log says: " 82c][rid#80eceb4/initial] (2) init rewrite engine with requested uri /Zope/manage 192.168.0.2 - - [15/Mar/2000:19:16:51 +0000] [rid#80eceb4/initial] (3) applying pattern '^/Zope/(.*)' to uri '/Zope/manage' [www.test.net/sid#80e182c][rid#80eceb4/initial] (4) RewriteCond: input='' pattern='^(.*)' => matched 192.168.0.2 - - [15/Mar/2000:19:16:51 +0000] [www.test.net/sid#80e182c][rid#80eceb4/initial] (2) rewrite /Zope/manage -> /usr/local/httpd/cgi-bin/Zope.cgi/manage 192.168.0.2 - - [15/Mar/2000:19:16:51 +0000] [www.test.net/sid#80e182c][rid#80eceb4/initial] (5) setting env variable 'HTTP_CGI_AUTHORIZATION' to '' 192.168.0.2 - - [15/Mar/2000:19:16:51 +0000] [www.test.net/sid#80e182c][rid#80eceb4/initial] (2) remember /usr/local/httpd/cgi-bin/Zope.cgi/manage to have MIME-type 'application/x-httpd-cgi' 192.168.0.2 - - [15/Mar/2000:19:16:51 +0000] [www.test.net/sid#80e182c][rid#80eceb4/initial] (2) local path result: /usr/local/httpd/cgi-bin/Zope.cgi/manage 192.168.0.2 - - [15/Mar/2000:19:16:51 +0000] [www.test.net/sid#80e182c][rid#80eceb4/initial] (1) go-ahead with /usr/local/httpd/cgi-bin/Zope.cgi/manage [OK] 192.168.0.2 - - [15/Mar/2000:19:16:51 +0000] [www.test.net/sid#80e182c][rid#80eceb4/initial] (1) force filename /usr/local/httpd/cgi-bin/Zope.cgi to have MIME-type 'application/x-httpd-cgi' again Im not sure what the 'force filename' bit mean and whether "setting env variable 'HTTP_CGI_AUTHORIZATION' to '' " looks right? Now I just get "You don't have permission to access /Zope/home on this server." no login prompts start screens or anything. Is there anyway of debugging the interaction between Zope and Apache rewrite? Thanks David "desperate to avoid PHP :)"

2 1

RE: [Zope] Personalization strategies. And just what does Broadvi sion do ?
by Paul Everitt 23 Mar '00

23 Mar '00

Chas wrote: > Just wondering if anyone has thought about personalization > services based on Zope ? PTK. > The most obvious/traditional approach seems to be : > 1. Acquire user information (via > forms/surveys/transaction-histories etc) > and store in RDB. > 2. When the user comes to the site (and either logs in or is > identified > by IP or cookie), query the RDB for customized content or > appropriate > products. > > OK, no magic there. But it's not very scalable in terms of : > a) Load. We can keep shoving Zope servers on the front end > but the RDB is going to get hammered if this has to occur > for each and every request. This isn't necessarily true. Zope caches objects, and the scenario you describe is well suited to the caching strategy. (That is, a user is probably going to come back again within a minute of their previous request.) Compare this to an RDBMS strategy where state is always being retrieved on each request. > b) Development. A more object-oriented approach would be nicer. > eg. Personalities with behaviours and properties. > Could a pool of persistent personalities be left floating > around ? (No, this is not an early April's fool) The PTK membership model allows arbitrary extension of methods and attributes. --Paul

2 1

RE: [Zope] Zope enterprise goes open source?
by Paul Everitt 23 Mar '00

23 Mar '00

> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Withers [mailto:chrisw@nipltd.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2000 6:24 AM > To: Martijn Pieters > Cc: Zope Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Zope] Zope enterprise goes open source? > > > > The URL on ZEO is: > > > > http://www.zope.org/Products/ZEO/ > > > > To be fair, there's not really a lot there... > > I think everyone wants to know how to get onto the mid-april > testing program! ;-) Sorry, I forgot that I hadn't uploaded the text of the FAQ. My network connection was horrible yesterday (I'm in a hotel in the Bay Area right now). I'll upload it in a moment. --Paul

1 0

RE: [Zope] ZEO beta qualifications
by Paul Everitt 23 Mar '00

23 Mar '00

As much as I appreciate the desire to get at ZEO early, we have to balance that with our limited resources internally. We're taking a conservative approach to getting it out the door, rather than just dumping code and telling people they're on their own. Hopefully everyone can appreciate this. Unfortunately we're taking a lot of flak, for instance, for not releasing Tracker. I wish we had unlimited resources, but that's just not the case. As everyone in the Zope community will probably agree, we need to do a better job and not a bigger job. --Paul > -----Original Message----- > From: Jimmie Houchin [mailto:jhouchin@texoma.net] > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2000 12:35 PM > To: zope(a)zope.org > Subject: [Zope] ZEO beta qualifications > > > This was also posted to the ZEO/ZWiki at > http://www.zope.org/Products/ZEO/Wiki/FrontPage > > Would there be any potential for allowing people who are doing > development only, not deployment stage, into the beta > program? Using ZEO > could change the way I design the app. At least this is a thought from > what I read in the description. > > I am very interested in learning the ZEO architecture and capabilities > but am only in a development phase. In other words, I will not be > offended by crashing or data corruption as I am in total > control of the > system, access and backups, etc. I thoroughly understand this > is a work > in progress. > > Just a thought. > > Jimmie Houchin. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 ) >

1 0

ZLDAPMethods problem/solution
by Wade Simmons 23 Mar '00

23 Mar '00

I'm using ZopeLDAP v. 1.0b1 The LDAP filter methods stopped working after upgrading to Zope 2.1.6 I changed line 259 in LM.py from: f=apply(f, (p,), argdata) to: f=apply(f, (p, argdata)) This seems to have solved the problem. Can anyone see a problem with this fix or a better solution? - Wade

1 0

ZEO beta qualifications
by Jimmie Houchin 23 Mar '00

23 Mar '00

This was also posted to the ZEO/ZWiki at http://www.zope.org/Products/ZEO/Wiki/FrontPage Would there be any potential for allowing people who are doing development only, not deployment stage, into the beta program? Using ZEO could change the way I design the app. At least this is a thought from what I read in the description. I am very interested in learning the ZEO architecture and capabilities but am only in a development phase. In other words, I will not be offended by crashing or data corruption as I am in total control of the system, access and backups, etc. I thoroughly understand this is a work in progress. Just a thought. Jimmie Houchin.

1 0

Re: [Zope] Server Sizing
by Peter Sabaini 23 Mar '00

23 Mar '00

here you are! (see end of post)(i hope you dont mind my adressing the list). btw. does anybody know of other benchmarking software? (i once tried to grab httperf but the ftp site holding the source is down...) ru, peter. On Wed, 22 Mar 2000, J. Atwood wrote: :Peter, : :Have you ever done these test against just the ZServer? : :JMA : :> From: Peter Sabaini <sabaini(a)niil.at> :> Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 13:36:17 +0100 (CET) :> To: Stephan Richter <srichter(a)cbu.edu> :> Cc: zope(a)zope.org :> Subject: RE: [Zope] Server Sizing :> :> On Wed, 22 Mar 2000, Stephan Richter wrote: :> :> :>i agree on apache increasing your performance when serving static :> :>files (for instance images), but wouldn't url rewriting and the proxy :> :>pass module of apache be an even better solution? i just switched from :> :>PCGI to the Rewrite/Proxypass combo because of the additional overhead :> :>of PCGI. :> : :> :Mmmhh, I have to have a look. Okay, I just read the the little tutorial. :> :Does it really speed things up? :> :I guess SSL should not be hard using this solution. I will be thinking :> :about it. :> : :> :Anyone else? :> : :> :> some testing with apache benchmark: :> :> the setup is an apache 1.3.12 sitting on port 1988. :> :> /tstfolder/bmeth is a very simple dtml method ("i am bmeth in :> /tstfolder" <dtml-call "REQUEST.set('testvar', 'hm...')"> :> &dtml-testvar;). :> :> i do 1000 requests at 50 concurrent users, keepalive-connection via :> apache benchmark: :> :> first the result of doing a proxypass to zserver on port 8080: :> :> ------ :> :> /root# /usr/local/apache/bin/ab -n 1000 -c 50 -k -v 2 :> http://druck.kleinezeitung.at:1988/tstfolder/bmeth :> This is ApacheBench, Version 1.3c <$Revision: 1.38 $> apache-1.3 :> Copyright (c) 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, :> http://www.zeustech.net/ :> Copyright (c) 1998-1999 The Apache Group, http://www.apache.org/ :> :> Benchmarking druck.kleinezeitung.at (be patient)...INFO: POST header :> == :> --- :> GET /tstfolder/bmeth HTTP/1.0 :> User-Agent: ApacheBench/1.3c :> Connection: Keep-Alive :> Host: druck.kleinezeitung.at :> Accept: */* :> :> :> --- :> Server Software: Zope/Zope :> Server Hostname: druck.kleinezeitung.at :> Server Port: 1988 :> :> Document Path: /tstfolder/bmeth :> Document Length: 25 bytes :> :> Concurrency Level: 50 :> Time taken for tests: 16.817 seconds :> Complete requests: 1000 :> Failed requests: 0 :> Keep-Alive requests: 0 :> Total transferred: 243000 bytes :> HTML transferred: 25000 bytes :> Requests per second: 59.46 :> Transfer rate: 14.45 kb/s received :> :> Connnection Times (ms) :> min avg max :> Connect: 0 1 38 :> Processing: 99 818 877 :> Total: 99 819 915 :> :> ---------------------- :> :> then i modify httpd.conf to get apache to talk to zope via :> PCGI / Zope.cgi (otherwise unchanged): :> :> ----------------------- :> :> /home/Zope# /usr/local/apache/bin/ab -n 1000 -c 50 -k -v 2 :> http://druck.kleinezeitung.at:1988/tstfolder/bmeth :> This is ApacheBench, Version 1.3c <$Revision: 1.38 $> apache-1.3 :> Copyright (c) 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, :> http://www.zeustech.net/ :> Copyright (c) 1998-1999 The Apache Group, http://www.apache.org/ :> :> Benchmarking druck.kleinezeitung.at (be patient)...INFO: POST header :> == :> --- :> GET /tstfolder/bmeth HTTP/1.0 :> User-Agent: ApacheBench/1.3c :> Connection: Keep-Alive :> Host: druck.kleinezeitung.at :> Accept: */* :> :> :> --- :> Server Software: Apache/1.3.12 :> Server Hostname: druck.kleinezeitung.at :> Server Port: 1988 :> :> Document Path: /tstfolder/bmeth :> Document Length: 25 bytes :> :> Concurrency Level: 50 :> Time taken for tests: 21.984 seconds :> Complete requests: 1000 :> Failed requests: 0 :> Keep-Alive requests: 1000 :> Total transferred: 273050 bytes :> HTML transferred: 25000 bytes :> Requests per second: 45.49 :> Transfer rate: 12.42 kb/s received :> :> Connnection Times (ms) :> min avg max :> Connect: 0 15 355 :> Processing: 41 1058 6039 :> Total: 41 1073 6394 :> :> -------------------- :> :> :> conclusion: with proxy pass i get around 30% more requests per second :> and around 25% less connection time (and im not able to use keep-alive :> as it seems). :> :> please note that this is only a quick check and not scientific in any :> way, and naturally the benefits will diminish when more complicated :> pages are going to be served. :> :> if there are any other test results please let me know... :> :> peter. ps.: same test to zserver directly (shows further increase in thoughput): /root# /usr/local/apache/bin/ab -n 1000 -c 50 -k -v 2 http://druck.kleinezeitung.at:8080/tstfolder/bmeth This is ApacheBench, Version 1.3c <$Revision: 1.38 $> apache-1.3 Copyright (c) 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, http://www.zeustech.net/ Copyright (c) 1998-1999 The Apache Group, http://www.apache.org/ Benchmarking druck.kleinezeitung.at (be patient)...INFO: POST header == --- GET /tstfolder/bmeth HTTP/1.0 User-Agent: ApacheBench/1.3c Connection: Keep-Alive Host: druck.kleinezeitung.at Accept: */* --- Server Software: Zope/Zope Server Hostname: druck.kleinezeitung.at Server Port: 8080 Document Path: /tstfolder/bmeth Document Length: 25 bytes Concurrency Level: 50 Time taken for tests: 14.821 seconds Complete requests: 1000 Failed requests: 0 Keep-Alive requests: 0 Total transferred: 224000 bytes HTML transferred: 25000 bytes Requests per second: 67.47 Transfer rate: 15.11 kb/s received Connnection Times (ms) min avg max Connect: 0 0 31 Processing: 209 722 734 Total: 209 722 765 -- _________________________________________________ peter sabaini, mailto: sabaini(a)niil.at -------------------------------------------------

4 3

ZWiki comments
by Jimmie Houchin 23 Mar '00

23 Mar '00

For a previous message I posted to the list I was prompted to place a comment in the associated ZWiki. I went to the ZWiki to comment and played with the "Sandbox" before posting to learn a few things. From the things I learned here are a couple of comments I wanted to throw out. I know some of these run counter to the thoughts of the Wiki community but they are concerns nevertheless. The nature of Wiki is very unsecured. This is for better or worse. I know the ZWiki on the Zope site does require logging in before editing which helps but does not eliminate the potential of malicious or accidental editing. Anyone logged in can do any kind of editing they wish on a page. They can erase all text. They can insert, delete or otherwise modify comments or content made by other people. These things can be positive or negative depending on the goal or intent of the page. I think editing a page is more applicable to stable open content than it is to a forum oriented page. Examples. If Zope's documentation was managed by ZWiki in a secure manner then a community member could make corrections of typo's or legacy information like references to Principia, etc. The submit button could either be a "Submit for review" or if really trusted "Change". I know this duplicates somewhat what CVS does. Once again depends on goals. If the page is forum oriented, i.e.: an on going conversation like a bulletin board and such then it is more appropriate to "Add comment" than to "Change page". This would present the user with a cleaner interface and a clearer idea of what they are doing. They would not be presented with the entire contents of a page so they could merely append a comment on the end. If the ZWiki on the Zope site starts getting busy we run into other problems. The problems especially affect a forum oriented type page. Just to learn I opened up the "Sandbox" in a new page, I then open the "Sandbox" again in a new page. I edited the first and submitted and then edited the second and submitted. The first was successful. The second fortunately got an error message. I say fortunately because it did not overwrite the previous submission. In a busy forum or BBoard multiple people getting errors would be a bad thing. If in a forum oriented page an "Add comment" button was available then the conflicts and errors would be avoided. This would also enable ZODB's transaction mechanism better with each comment being an object associated with the page. This would also be more secure in that people would adding their value and not altering other peoples. On Philip Greenspun's site http://www.photo.net the BBoard's are somewhat integrated with email. You can subscribe to a bboard and receive email for the added comments. This is a nice feature. Their implementation is quite inelegant and could be improved. Zope/ZWiki could shine here. This allows user to choose how they want to view the messages, either through the web or via email. Just a few thoughts to throw out to the community. Jimmie Houchin

1 0

Uncaught exception in OFS.Image with LocalFS
by Brad Crittenden 23 Mar '00

23 Mar '00

hello: i'm using Zope 2.1.6 and LocalFS 0.1.7. when i try to view an image via a LocalFS object i get an exception in OFS.Image.py at line 187: last_mod =int(self._p_mtime) the error occurs the *first* time i try to access a specific image with a recently launched browser. accessing other images or subsequent hits to the troublesome image in the same browser do not cause the problem. subsequent hits in the same launch of zope from a fresh browser on another machine causes the exception. having modified Image.py to catch the exception and dump some information i see that self._p_mtime is None. i've looked around but cannot determine where _p_mtime is defined or how it is supposed to be set. i see this method in Image was re-written after Zope 2.1.4. similarly, accessing a .wav file via LocalFS causes the following message: 2000-03-23T16:27:13 ERROR(200) ZServer uncaptured python exception, closing chan nel <zhttp_channel connected 127.0.0.1:4864 at b7d340 channel#: 15 requests:1> ( exceptions.AttributeError:'int' object has no attribute 'send' [D:\myzope\ZSer ver\medusa\asyncore.py|poll|64] [D:\myzope\ZServer\medusa\asyncore.py|handle_w rite_event|298] [D:\myzope\ZServer\medusa\asynchat.py|handle_write|144] [D:\myzope\ZServer\medusa\asynchat.py|initiate_send|211] [D:\myzope\ZServer\medusa \http_server.py|send|400] [D:\myzope\ZServer\medusa\asyncore.py|send|231] [<st ring>|send|1]) the wav file is delivered to the browser correctly. as a quick fix to the Image problem, i catch the exception, set last_mod = 0, and continue. this does not seem to have any ill effects. --brad

2 1