[ZODB-Dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Contents of Initial Data.fs in Zope Distribution?

[Jeff Rush]

I don't quite understand -- so there *are* root
level elements specific to Zope that need to
be copied into a Zope-over-ZEO environment?
(hm, how do those elements get into a
non-FileStorage Zope-over-ZEO environment?)

And do those elements interfere even a little in
a non-Zope-just-ZEO environment?  The only way I
can imagine, other than simplistic name clashes
would be if a full iteration of such a ZODB would
cause unghosting of objects lacking Zope .pyc
and raise unnecessary exceptions.

I ask because I'm trying to decide whether two
ZEO RPMs are needed re ZEO-wo-Zope-2.0-1.i386.rpm
and ZEO-w-Zope-2.0-1.i386.rpm, or just one.
Somewhat similar to how the Zope RPMs have
separate ZServer and PCGI flavor packages.

-Jeff Rush


Casey Duncan wrote:
> It is only there due to lack of time to take it out. We had planned to take it 
> out for 2.6, but time was never made to replace it with code to bootstrap an 
> empty storage with the proper root level elements still residing in 
> Data.fs.in.
> 
> -Casey
> 
> On Wednesday 13 November 2002 02:22 pm, Jeff Rush wrote:
> 
>>Working on updating my ZOPE and ZEO RPMs I got
>>to wondering...
>>
>>What's in the default data.fs that ships with
>>Zope?  I mean, ZEO (actually ZODB) auto-creates
>>a data.fs when one isn't found, so why does
>>Zope come with one?
>>
>>Or if there -is- something Zope-specific in
>>data.fs, then shouldn't there be a warning
>>in the ZEO notes that when ZEO is used
>>_underneath_ Zope, be sure to copy the
>>data.fs that comes with it?
>>
>>My experience has always been with ZEO and
>>StandaloneZODB, not ZEO+Zope so I'm puzzled.
>>
>>-Jeff