Backport to branch(3.10) : Fix to put state even in read-only transactions #189
Conversation
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Summary of Changes
Hello @feeblefakie, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
This pull request is an automated backport to the 3.10 branch, addressing a fix that ensures transaction state is properly recorded by the state manager. The core change involves adjusting the timing of the state recording call to guarantee it happens for all transactions, including read-only ones, when state management is active. Accompanying this fix are refactored and expanded unit tests to provide robust validation of the corrected behavior.
Highlights
- Transaction State Management Fix: The logic for recording transaction state via
stateManager.putCommithas been relocated within thecommit()method ofScalarTamperEvidentAssetLedger.java. This ensures that the state is consistently put (recorded) before the transaction commits, even if the transaction does not involve any explicit data writes (i.e., it's a read-only transaction), provided thattxStateManagementEnabledis true. - Enhanced Test Coverage: The unit tests for
ScalarTamperEvidentAssetLedgerhave been significantly improved by adopting JUnit 5'sParameterizedTest. This allows for more comprehensive testing of thestateManager.putCommitbehavior across various scenarios, including both write and read-only transactions, and when transaction state management is either enabled or disabled. - Build Dependency Update: The
build.gradlefile has been updated to includejunit-jupiter-paramsas atestImplementationdependency, which is necessary to support the new parameterized tests introduced in the test suite.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
| Feature | Command | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
| Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
| Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
| Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments to provide feedback.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request backports a fix to ensure transaction state is recorded even for read-only transactions when transaction state management is enabled. The state-saving call has been moved outside the write-set check. The test suite has been refactored to use parameterized tests, but there's a missing test case for empty snapshots when transaction state management is enabled.
| @ParameterizedTest | ||
| @ValueSource(booleans = {true, false}) | ||
| public void commit_ReadOnlyTransactionGiven_ShouldPutWithStateManagerAccordingToConfig( | ||
| boolean txStateManagementEnabled) | ||
| throws CrudException, CommitException, | ||
| com.scalar.db.exception.transaction.UnknownTransactionStatusException { | ||
| // Arrange | ||
| when(config.isTxStateManagementEnabled()).thenReturn(false); | ||
| snapshot.put(ANY_ID, asset); | ||
| snapshot.put(ANY_ID, ANY_DATA); | ||
| doNothing().when(transaction).put(any(List.class)); | ||
| doNothing().when(transaction).put(any(Put.class)); | ||
| when(config.isTxStateManagementEnabled()).thenReturn(txStateManagementEnabled); | ||
| when(config.isDirectAssetAccessEnabled()).thenReturn(false); | ||
| when(transaction.getId()).thenReturn(ANY_NONCE); | ||
| doNothing().when(stateManager).putCommit(any(DistributedTransaction.class), anyString()); | ||
| snapshot.put(ANY_ID, asset); | ||
|
|
||
| // Act | ||
| ledger.commit(); | ||
|
|
||
| // Assert | ||
| verify(stateManager, never()).putCommit(transaction, ANY_NONCE); | ||
| verify(transaction).put(any(List.class)); | ||
| verify(transaction).put(any(Put.class)); | ||
| if (txStateManagementEnabled) { | ||
| verify(stateManager).putCommit(transaction, ANY_NONCE); | ||
| } else { | ||
| verify(stateManager, never()).putCommit(any(DistributedTransaction.class), anyString()); | ||
| } | ||
| verify(transaction, never()).put(any(List.class)); | ||
| verify(transaction, never()).put(any(Put.class)); | ||
| verify(transaction).commit(); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The tests commit_TxStateManagementDisabled_ShouldNotPutWithStateManager and commit_TxStateManagementEnabled_ShouldPutWithStateManager were removed and replaced with commit_ReadOnlyTransactionGiven_ShouldPutWithStateManagerAccordingToConfig and commit_WriteTransactionGiven_ShouldPutWithStateManagerAccordingToConfig.
However, the new tests do not cover the scenario where the snapshot is empty (no reads or writes). Please consider adding a test case to cover this scenario, as the stateManager.putCommit() method will still be called when txStateManagementEnabled is true.
2 participants
This is an automated backport of the following:
Please merge this PR after all checks have passed.