[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: (LMDB) read-only transactions and DBI handles

Viacheslav Usov wrote:

On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 3:37 AM, Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com
<mailto:hyc@symas.com>> wrote:

 > abort is the way to end *any* transaction whose operations you wish to discard.

 > commit is the way to end *any* transaction whose operations you wish to
persist.

If one is to interpret DBI handles as entities that can be created, persisted
and discarded by transactions, then this interpretation is difficult to
reconcile with the fact that this can be done by a read-only transaction.
A DBI handle is simply a slot in an in-memory array. Read-only transactions are read-only with respect to the database. 


This interpretation is even more problematic if one considers that a
transaction, including a read-only transaction, can discard entities it never
created to begin with.


No, no transaction can discard something that it didn't create.


At a more fundamental level, LMDB is said to support "multiple sub-databases
[...] with transactions covering all sub-databases" [1]. However, LMDB's API
with respect to sub-databases and transactions is not orthogonal [2]. With an
orthogonal API, a DBI handle would remain valid as long as the underlying
sub-database existed, regardless of commits and aborts in transactions using it.
No. Aborting a transaction essentially means that no operation that was performed inside the transaction actually took place. Sub-DBs exist within the database regardless of whether any process has a DBI handle open on them.
Your statement is preposterous. It is the same as saying that file handles in an operating system must stay open as long as files exist in a filesystem. Utter nonsense. 


Now, I am not saying that LMDB must be orthogonal in that sense. This is
definitely a design choice, and there may be good reasons why it is impossible
or difficult for LMDB to behave that way. What I am saying, however, is that
such a mode would be very nice to have, if it is not too difficult to
implement. It could be requested by a flag passed to, preferably, mdb_dbi_open
or to mdb_txn_begin.


Nonsense.

--
  -- Howard Chu
  CTO, Symas Corp.           http://www.symas.com
  Director, Highland Sun     http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
  Chief Architect, OpenLDAP  http://www.openldap.org/project/