This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 26, 2024. It is now read-only.
-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
Do not always start a db txn on Postgres #14840
Merged
Merged
Changes from 4 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1 @@ | ||
Prevent "WARNING: there is already a transaction in progress" lines appearing in PostgreSQL's logs on some occasions. |
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Is
db_conn.autocmmit
always false for sqlite? Can we simplify this to:Note that attempting to set auto-commit for sqlite seems to be a no-op:
synapse/synapse/storage/engines/sqlite.py
Lines 114 to 119 in 8c94dd3
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.
From playing around in the manhole, it sadly appears that
autocommit
isn't a valid attribute in the case of SQLite: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.
https://docs.python.org/3/library/sqlite3.html?highlight=sqlite3#transaction-control
🫠🫠
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.
That's annoying. I secretly want to burn all
isinstance(foo, FooEngine)
....but not a big deal. 👍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.
It looks like sqlite can be in an autocommit mode or an implicit transaction mode, depending on the value of isolation_level.
It'd be nice if we could abstract these details away into the DB engines somehow. The ideal would be something like
but I don't know if that's going to open up an even bigger can of worms. Maybe see what the rest of the team think?
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 abstraction sounds like a good idea. I'd not block the PR on it though.