[Patches] [ python-Patches-403445 ] Fixed DB_RECNO support in bsddb module
nobody
nobody@sourceforge.net
Tue, 27 Feb 2001 10:58:32 -0800
Patches #403445, was updated on 2001-01-26 10:34
You can respond by visiting:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=403445&group_id=5470
Category: Modules
Group: None
Status: Closed
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Gustavo Niemeyer
Assigned to: Fred L. Drake, Jr.
Summary: Fixed DB_RECNO support in bsddb module
Initial Comment:
This module was handling DB_RECNO databases incorrectly, handling
the keys as strings. As the documentation says, RECNO (record number)
databases must deal with integers, using the special type recno_t. This
patch fixes it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Fred L. Drake, Jr.
Date: 2001-02-27 10:58
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=3066
Checked in as Modules/bsddbmodule.c revision 1.28.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Gustavo Niemeyer
Date: 2001-02-20 08:49
Message:
Ok. This bug is happening due to a libdb bug. Between other things, it's
closing the input fd (0). I've done a little hack to avoid this bug, so, I'm
sending an updated patch.
Thanks!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Fred L. Drake, Jr.
Date: 2001-02-19 13:07
Message:
I'm inclined to apply this, but am having problems with the bsddb module in general. I would like to see some tests that work with RECNO databases. With or without this patch, this snippet:
>>> import bsddb
>>> db = bsddb.rnopen('foo.db')
(where foo.db does not exist) is causing a core dump somewhere in the exception handling code (Mandrake Linux 7.1, stock libraries). What platform did you test this patch on? What versions of the libraries?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Fred L. Drake, Jr.
Date: 2001-01-27 23:11
Message:
Re-assigned to me; Skip only worked on the build process for this, not the module code.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Fred L. Drake, Jr.
Date: 2001-01-26 22:06
Message:
I think this is fine from a quick eyeballing of the code, but would add the di_type declaration before the WITH_THREAD conditional section so that the optional part is at the end.
Assigned to Skip since he's dealt a lot with this module recently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=403445&group_id=5470