New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open JSON files lock-free if there are many #10188
Merged
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think our current approach for requiring a lock in a protected/private method is to pass a
unique_lock
reference as a param. Like we do inCatalogSet::CreateDefaultEntries(CatalogTransaction transaction, unique_lock<mutex> &lock);
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The lock must be held for the code within the function. There are two types of uses for this. One where we grab the lock and call the function right after, and one where we've been holding on to the lock and then need to call the function.
I don't understand what using a
unique_lock
and passing it to the function would achieve here. We then would also need to add a parameterbool i_already_have_the_lock
and then not lock it if this istrue
, or we would need to unlock and then call the function, which would grab the lock again.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the idea is that if you should only call a function with the lock, making it impossible to call the function without the lock makes things a bit cleaner. I see that we do both throughout the code for protected/private methods: adding a comment that holding the lock is required and passing a unique_lock or lock_guard as an argument (sometimes in a wrapper class like
ClientContextLock
)I have no strong opinion here, Im fine with merging it like this
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree with being safe, but I will leave this as it is. Thanks!