ZEO and NEO are not yet adjusted to new "watchq vs Close" requirement.

For https://github.com/DataDog/czlib/pull/5

* master:
  go/zodb/fs1: Fix access to whiteout
  go/zodb/fs1tools: tests: Use fresh dumper for each subtest
  go/zodb/fs1: Fix Python database generator to work with recent zodbtools
  go/zodb/zeo: msgpack.{Encode,Decode} -> msgpack.{Marshal,Unmarshal}
  go/neo/proto: UUID -> NID (NodeID)
  go/neo/internal/xsha1: New package to compute NEO-flavoured SHA1
  go/neo/t/tzodb.go: Switch to tasks and task-integrated logging
  go/internal/task: New package  (draft)
  go/internal/log: New package  (draft)
  go/internal/xcontext/task: New package  (draft)

A data record with len(data)=0 and backpointer=0 is considered by
FileStorage/py as "no data":

https://github.com/zopefoundation/ZODB/blob/5.6.0-15-g22d1405d4/src/ZODB/FileStorage/FileStorage.py#L576-L582

Even though currently it is not possible to create such data record via
FileStorage(py).deleteObject (becase it raises POSKeyError if there is
no previous object revision), being able to use such data records is
semantically useful in overlayed DemoStorage settings, where δ part
marks an object that exists only in base with delete record whiteout.

It is also generally meaningfull to be able to create "delete" record
even if object was not previously existing: "deleteObject" is actually
similar to "store" (and so should be better named as "storeDelete"). If
one wants to store deletion, there should not be a reason to reject it,
because deleteObject already has seatbelt in the form of oldserial, and
if the user calls deleteObject(oid, oldserial=z64), he/she is already
telling that "I know that this object does not exist in this storage
(oldserial=z64), but still please create a deletion record for it". Once
again this is useful in overlayed DemoStorage settings described above.

For the reference, such whiteout deletion records pass ZODB/scripts/fstest just fine.

Even though FileStorage/py loads such data records just fine, on
FileStorage/go side it was not the case - DataHeader.LoadBackRef, even
with backpointer=0, was verifying that backpointer to be valid and
failing seeing it might overlap with current transaction:

    === RUN   TestLoadWhiteout
    2021/03/17 06:40:58 index load: open testdata/whiteout.fs.index: no such file or directory
    2021/03/17 06:40:58 testdata/whiteout.fs: index rebuild...
        filestorage_test.go:398: load 0000000000000017:0000000000000001: bad err:
            have: testdata/whiteout.fs: load 0000000000000017:0000000000000001: testdata/whiteout.fs: data record @27: check: backpointer (0) overlaps with txn (4)
            want: testdata/whiteout.fs: load 0000000000000017:0000000000000001: 0000000000000001: object was not yet created

It was a thinko: backPos==0 was already kind of handled in LoadBackRef,
but only in one verification case. -> Fix all checks not to trigger when
seeing backPos=0. DataHeader.LoadBack - the caller of LoadBackRef -
already handles returned backPos=0 as "no data".

We were reusing Dumper instance in between testDump subtests. This was
not noticed, as it was only "1" and then "empty" case, because "emtpy"
has no transactions. However in the next patch we'll add another
subcase, and if the dumper instance is not reset, it will think that it
starts from transaction number non-zero, which would differ from fresh
dumper output.

-> Fix it.

As Zodbtools dropped ZODB3 support its run_with_zodb3py2_compat was
renamed to run_with_zodb4py2_compat:

nexedi/zodbtools@c59a54ca

Encode/decode was deprecated and removed in recent github.com/shamaton/msgpack.