[Zodb-checkins] CVS: ZODB3 - NEWS.txt:1.33.6.83

Tim Peters tim.one at comcast.net
Fri Jul 1 15:55:38 EDT 2005


Update of /cvs-repository/ZODB3
In directory cvs.zope.org:/tmp/cvs-serv29503

Modified Files:
      Tag: Zope-2_7-branch
	NEWS.txt 
Log Message:
Collector 1829.

Clarified that the ``minKey()`` and ``maxKey()`` methods raise an exception
if no key exists satsifying the constraints.

Also improved the English in other interface docstrings.


=== ZODB3/NEWS.txt 1.33.6.82 => 1.33.6.83 ===
--- ZODB3/NEWS.txt:1.33.6.82	Mon Jun 27 13:10:24 2005
+++ ZODB3/NEWS.txt	Fri Jul  1 15:55:07 2005
@@ -5,20 +5,21 @@
 Following are dates of internal releases (to support ongoing Zope 2.7
 development) since ZODB 3.2's last public release:
 
+- 3.2.9b2 01-Jul-2005
 - 3.2.9b1 27-Jun-2005
 
 Subtransactions
 ---------------
 
-- (3.2.9b1) Doing a subtransaction commit erroneously processed 
-  invalidations, which could lead to an inconsistent view of the database.  
-  For example, let T be the transaction of which the subtransaction commit 
-  was a part.  If T read a persistent object O's state before the 
-  subtransaction commit, did not commit new state of its own for O during its 
-  subtransaction commit, and O was modified before the subtransaction commit 
-  by a different transaction, then the subtransaction commit processed an 
-  invalidation for O, and the state T read for O originally was discarded in 
-  T.  If T went on to access O again, it saw the newly committed (by a 
+- (3.2.9b1) Doing a subtransaction commit erroneously processed
+  invalidations, which could lead to an inconsistent view of the database.
+  For example, let T be the transaction of which the subtransaction commit
+  was a part.  If T read a persistent object O's state before the
+  subtransaction commit, did not commit new state of its own for O during its
+  subtransaction commit, and O was modified before the subtransaction commit
+  by a different transaction, then the subtransaction commit processed an
+  invalidation for O, and the state T read for O originally was discarded in
+  T.  If T went on to access O again, it saw the newly committed (by a
   different transaction) state for O::
 
       o_attr = O.some_attribute
@@ -30,19 +31,24 @@
 FileStorage.UndoSearch
 ----------------------
 
-- (3.2.9b1) The ``_readnext()`` method now returns the transaction size as 
-  the value of the "size" key.  Thanks to Dieter Maurer for the patch, from 
-  http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zodb-dev/2003-October/006157.html. "This is 
-  very valuable when you want to spot strange transaction sizes via Zope's 
+- (3.2.9b1) The ``_readnext()`` method now returns the transaction size as
+  the value of the "size" key.  Thanks to Dieter Maurer for the patch, from
+  http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zodb-dev/2003-October/006157.html. "This is
+  very valuable when you want to spot strange transaction sizes via Zope's
   'Undo' tab".
 
-
 Error reporting
 ---------------
 
-- (3.2.9b1) In the unlikely event that ``referencesf()`` reports an 
-  unpickling error (for example, a corrupt database can cause this), the 
+- (3.2.9b1) In the unlikely event that ``referencesf()`` reports an
+  unpickling error (for example, a corrupt database can cause this), the
   message it produces no longer contains unprintable characters.
+
+BTrees interface
+----------------
+
+- (3.2.9b2) Collector 1829.  Clarified that the ``minKey()`` and ``maxKey()``
+  methods raise an exception if no key exists satsifying the constraints.
 
 
 What's new in ZODB3 3.2.8?



More information about the Zodb-checkins mailing list