| 00:35.33 | *** join/#storm jml_ (n=jml@ppp108-61.static.internode.on.net) |
| 00:49.19 | *** join/#storm WebMaven (n=webmaven@c-24-218-183-144.hsd1.ma.comcast.net) |
| 01:20.20 | *** join/#storm Key_Gena (i=lok@gateway/tor/x-bc307e40b6d02bc8) |
| 01:51.59 | *** join/#storm jml_ (n=jml@ppp108-61.static.internode.on.net) |
| 02:06.03 | *** join/#storm jml__ (n=jml@ppp108-61.static.internode.on.net) |
| 02:07.00 | *** join/#storm jml (n=jml@ppp108-61.static.internode.on.net) |
| 03:30.54 | *** join/#storm Key_Gena (i=lok@gateway/tor/x-60277196d4332a7c) |
| 04:15.42 | *** join/#storm jml_ (n=jml@ppp108-61.static.internode.on.net) |
| 04:42.50 | *** join/#storm dobee (n=dobeee@194.183.146.186) |
| 04:57.48 | *** join/#storm jukart (n=jukart@85-124-221-45.static.xdsl-line.inode.at) |
| 05:41.35 | *** join/#storm jukart (n=jukart@lsfw01.lovelysystems.com) |
| 07:45.05 | *** join/#storm jukart (n=jukart@lsfw01.lovelysystems.com) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 07:45.05 | *** join/#storm LarstiQ (n=larstiq@cust.7.157.adsl.cistron.nl) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 08:38.20 | *** join/#storm mcella (n=michele@ip-176-22.sn2.eutelia.it) |
| 09:21.19 | *** join/#storm bigdo2 (n=scmikes@72-197-8-8-arpa.cust.cinci.current.net) |
| 11:58.37 | *** join/#storm jukart (n=jukart@217.6.33.106) |
| 12:06.08 | *** join/#storm WebMaven (n=webmaven@c-24-218-183-144.hsd1.ma.comcast.net) |
| 13:07.10 | *** join/#storm Key_Gena (i=lok@gateway/tor/x-21ff01e363327c15) |
| 13:28.50 | *** join/#storm wallflower (n=wallflow@216.113.246.205) |
| 13:38.57 | dobee | hi all |
| 13:39.11 | dobee | is it somehow possible to make __storm_table__ dynamic |
| 13:40.00 | dobee | dobee: i mean on a per thread basis |
| 13:55.46 | radix | dobee: hm |
| 13:55.52 | radix | dobee: maybe you should explain your high-level application requirement :-) |
| 13:56.39 | dobee | hi radix, i have a zope application and want different tables for different instances |
| 13:56.49 | dobee | but some of them should be shared |
| 13:56.56 | radix | dobee: why do you want that? |
| 13:57.33 | dobee | because the ones that are shared have 10000000 + rows |
| 13:57.42 | dobee | and i dont want to replicate that, or should i? |
| 13:57.57 | dobee | 1 000 000 + |
| 13:57.59 | dobee | sorry |
| 13:58.24 | radix | you've lost me. What is your concern? What problem are you trying to solve? |
| 13:58.28 | dobee | currenty i am thinnking about to set the default schema on connect time for postgres |
| 14:00.11 | dobee | radix: i have a database of a million books, and i want to share those tables on different zope applications, each of them put ratings/comments etc on that books, i store the application specific stuff in seperate tables |
| 14:00.31 | radix | OK. So you've got some books. And you have some application-specific data relating to those books. |
| 14:01.06 | dobee | yes and i dont want to have a primary key with the application name, because that slows down lookups |
| 14:02.04 | radix | "primary key with the application name"? I'm not sure why that's relevant, but I don't really understand what you just said. |
| 14:02.41 | dobee | let's say i have a table called comments |
| 14:02.51 | dobee | i want a different table for each zope application |
| 14:02.53 | dobee | like |
| 14:03.00 | dobee | firstapp_comments |
| 14:03.45 | radix | Ah. I think I just figured you out. |
| 14:03.47 | dobee | maybe i should use postgres default schema stuff, where i define a default schema to upon connecting |
| 14:03.59 | dobee | so i don't have to mess with storm |
| 14:04.11 | radix | dobee: You could also do this: |
| 14:04.19 | radix | class Comment(...): |
| 14:04.27 | radix | <PROTECTED> |
| 14:04.32 | radix | class MyAppComment(...): |
| 14:04.41 | radix | <PROTECTED> |
| 14:04.50 | radix | err, I meant to show MyAppComment subclassing Comment. |
| 14:05.19 | dobee | sorry i guess i explained it wrong what about this |
| 14:05.22 | radix | but maybe you should use postgres default schema, then you wouldn't have to have multiple Comment classes, even if they're just trivial subclasses overriding __storm_table__ |
| 14:05.33 | dobee | firstintance_of_my_app_comments |
| 14:05.40 | radix | oh. |
| 14:05.48 | radix | I thought they were different applications, not just different instances of applications. |
| 14:05.48 | dobee | the use case is |
| 14:05.57 | radix | Ok, then yeah, sounds like postgres' default schema thing would be useful. |
| 14:06.06 | dobee | we have book portals for different countries which should share the book data |
| 14:06.15 | dobee | yes i think too |
| 14:06.22 | radix | OTOH, I'm slightly surprised that you think that adding an app ID column is too slow, assuming you've got it indexed. |
| 14:07.18 | dobee | hm, dunno, we have huge performance issues, so each millisecond is important |
| 14:07.31 | dobee | well, without indexing the app dies |
| 14:08.14 | dobee | but anyway thx, radix i'll try to get the schema stuff working |
| 14:18.31 | *** join/#storm bigdog (n=scmikes@72-197-8-8-arpa.cust.cinci.current.net) |
| 14:36.11 | *** join/#storm niemeyer (n=niemeyer@200.140.230.150) |
| 15:21.30 | *** join/#storm bigdo1 (n=scmikes@72-197-8-8-arpa.cust.cinci.current.net) |
| 15:26.42 | *** join/#storm niemeyer (n=niemeyer@200.140.230.150) |
| 15:45.37 | *** join/#storm hagna (n=hagna@70.98.162.62) |
| 15:48.33 | hagna | so I have a result that includes names of people how can I specify a result set of only certain people |
| 15:48.46 | hagna | should I query the db again or use intersect or remove on the resultset? |
| 15:49.11 | radix | hagna: well, how'd you get the result set in the first place? |
| 15:49.26 | hagna | radix: store.find(Bug ..... |
| 15:49.31 | hagna | hi radix |
| 15:49.40 | radix | hagna: add another argument to the store.find call to limit it to certain people |
| 15:49.45 | radix | hagna: hi :-) |
| 15:49.51 | hagna | radix: so do the query again |
| 15:49.54 | radix | no... |
| 15:50.03 | hagna | um |
| 15:50.05 | radix | don't do the wrong query in the first place, I mean :-) |
| 15:50.12 | hagna | hehe |
| 15:50.14 | hagna | I need both |
| 15:50.38 | radix | I don't think I follow. |
| 15:50.57 | hagna | I'm making a weekly bug summary of bugs from bugzilla |
| 15:51.29 | hagna | and it needs weeklyOpened (which includes reopened) and weeklyOpenedByOwner |
| 15:53.22 | hagna | weeklyOpenedByOwner is just weeklyOpened but you can do weeklyOpenedByOwner['me'] to find all my bugs |
| 15:55.44 | hagna | maybe I'm painting myself into a corner |
| 15:55.47 | hagna | it feels like it |
| 15:58.11 | radix | I don't understand what you're talking about at all |
| 15:59.03 | hagna | radix: this should make it easier |
| 15:59.12 | hagna | self.weeklyOpen = self.st.find(Bug, ((self.expr_dt) & (self.expr_ppl))) |
| 15:59.21 | hagna | for reporter in reporters: self.weeklyOpenedByReporter[reporter] = self.st.find(Bug, (self.expr_dt) & (self.expr_open) & (self.expr_ppl) & (Bug.reporter_ref == reporter)) |
| 16:01.08 | radix | hagna: you know you can pass multiple expressions to store.find? |
| 16:01.40 | radix | hagna: store.find(Bug, Bug.name == "foo", Bug.reporter == "bar") etc. |
| 16:01.40 | hagna | yes isn't that what '((self.expr_dt) & (self.expr_ppl)' is? |
| 16:01.46 | radix | no, you don't need the & |
| 16:02.07 | hagna | ok what about OR |
| 16:02.24 | radix | Or(Bug.name == "foo", Bug.reporter == "bar") |
| 16:02.32 | hagna | radix: oh yeah keep forgetting that |
| 16:02.51 | radix | anyway, I guess this is all irrelevant |
| 16:02.54 | radix | you showed me some Python code |
| 16:03.00 | radix | it didn't really make your problem more clear to me :) |
| 16:03.02 | hagna | well it wasn't tabbed |
| 16:03.59 | hagna | radix: we're talking about a bugzilla database |
| 16:04.12 | radix | yes |
| 16:04.17 | hagna | :) |
| 16:04.26 | radix | well, I can understand that being your problem |
| 16:04.27 | hagna | and there are bugs opened during the week |
| 16:04.34 | hagna | not all assigned to the same person |
| 16:04.40 | radix | ok. |
| 16:04.56 | hagna | wow talking about it helps |
| 16:05.24 | hagna | and it's nice to know the total number of open bugs |
| 16:05.53 | hagna | and it's nice to lookup the bugs by person |
| 16:06.46 | hagna | but all we really need is a list of open bugs and there isn't really a need to have a dictionary like {'owner':ResultSet, 'owner2':ResultSet} |
| 16:07.12 | radix | umm, ok. |
| 16:08.09 | hagna | thanks |
| 16:08.47 | *** join/#storm michelp (n=michelp@69-30-72-119.dq1sf.easystreet.com) |
| 16:25.01 | *** join/#storm rafael (n=rafael@moinmoin/fan/rafael) |
| 17:35.45 | *** join/#storm rafael (n=rafael@moinmoin/fan/rafael) |
| 17:41.39 | *** join/#storm rafael_ (n=rafael@p5B2A50A7.dip.t-dialin.net) |
| 18:28.31 | *** join/#storm Key_Gena (i=lok@gateway/tor/x-af6e62443cb60e33) |
| 19:23.23 | *** part/#storm richardb (n=richard@atreus.tartarus.org) |
| 19:58.25 | *** join/#storm leifkb (n=leifkb@dsl82.brbovtma.sover.net) |
| 20:07.09 | *** join/#storm Key_Gena (i=lok@gateway/tor/x-13415fa55b56c9e7) |
| 20:15.07 | *** join/#storm jkakar (n=jkakar@204-174-36-45.dhcp802.dsl.ucc-net.ca) |
| 20:37.24 | *** join/#storm jkakar (n=jkakar@204-174-36-45.dhcp802.dsl.ucc-net.ca) |
| 20:40.37 | *** join/#storm mibuk (n=mib@bluewigwam.plus.com) |
| 20:43.52 | mibuk | hey, I'm just starting with storm, and am getting some weird results running the tutorial. |
| 20:44.07 | radix | mibuk: Ok |
| 20:44.09 | mibuk | I wrote out the tutorial by hand, the first bit anyway, and changed hte datbaase type to use postgres instead of sqlite. When I execute the code up to the store.find(Person, Person.name==u"Joe").one() I get a traceback indicating that storm attempted to insert a null into the id column. |
| 20:44.15 | mibuk | Anyone know if it's a known bug/issue, or how toget around it? |
| 20:44.38 | mibuk | If I set the id by hand it works correctly, but obvously I don't get autogenerated id's which is useless |
| 20:44.52 | radix | mibuk: Then you didn't create the schema in postgres correctly, probably |
| 20:45.12 | radix | mibuk: postgres and sqlite don't have the same schema definition language, to put it bluntly |
| 20:45.26 | mibuk | ah, so it's the create table bit |
| 20:45.32 | radix | yeah. |
| 20:46.05 | radix | mibuk: You want to change 'id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY' to 'id SERIAL NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY' |
| 20:47.35 | mibuk | ah, I somewhat assumed that it was storm that was providing the id's not eh database, that makes a lot more sense, cheers |
| 20:48.06 | mibuk | that works beautifully, thanks |
| 20:48.21 | radix | :-) |
| 21:01.43 | *** join/#storm flurl (n=flurl@85-127-140-198.adsl-line.inode.at) |
| 21:03.23 | *** join/#storm metatheorem (n=metatheo@cpe-24-169-128-34.rochester.res.rr.com) |
| 22:31.32 | *** part/#storm Key_Gena (i=lok@gateway/tor/x-13415fa55b56c9e7) |
| 22:33.35 | *** part/#storm mibuk (n=mib@bluewigwam.plus.com) |
| 22:40.56 | *** join/#storm Key_Gena (i=lok@gateway/tor/x-1ccad65f59f2e2e8) |
| 23:15.14 | *** join/#storm jml (n=jml@ppp121-44-213-76.lns1.hba1.internode.on.net) |
| 23:45.58 | *** join/#storm WebMaven (n=webmaven@c-24-218-183-144.hsd1.ma.comcast.net) |
| 23:58.48 | *** join/#storm wallflower (n=wallflow@216.113.246.205) |