[Python-Dev] RE: [spambayes-dev] improving dumbdbm's survival chances...
Sun, 13 Jul 2003 20:26:41 -0500
>> It seems that dumbdbm doesn't support a sync() method which shelve
>> likes to call. Shelve's sync method gets called from time-to-time by
>> the Spambayes storage code. dumbdbm.sync has this statement:
Tim> No, you're quoting shelve.py here:
>> if hasattr(self.dict, 'sync'):
Yup. The Spambayes storage code calls Shelve's sync method. It in turn (in
the code I quoted) will call the underlying db module's sync method if it
has it. It seems to me that dumdbm's _commit() method is the same as the
sync() method which Shelve is looking for.
>> def open_dumbdbm(*args):
>> """Open a dumbdbm database."""
>> import dumbdbm
>> db = dumbdbm.open(*args)
>> if not hasattr(db, "sync"):
>> db.sync = db._commit
>> return db
Tim> That would help spambayes a lot, because DBDictClassifier.store()
Tim> does call self.db.sync() on its Shelf at the important times.
Yeah, that's what I was getting at.
Tim> People using dumbdbm with spambayes would still be a lot better off
Tim> using a plain in-memory dict, though (on all counts: it would
Tim> consume less memory, consume less disk space for the dict pickle,
Tim> and run faster).
Tim> Fine by me, although I doubt a 2.2.4 will get released. Adding
Tim> sync = _commit
Tim> to the 2.3 code (+ docs + test) should be sufficient.
I'm willing to do that. Martin seemed to disagree that it should go in
until after 2.3 is released. I'll submit a patch and let others decide.