Hi, I need a bit of time to read the docs and clear my thoughts, but one
On 02/25/2019 01:49 AM, William Brown wrote:
> On 23 Feb 2019, at 02:46, Mark Reynolds <mreynolds(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> I want to start a brief discussion about a major problem we have backend transaction
plugins and the entry caches. I'm finding that when we get into a nested state of be
txn plugins and one of the later plugins that is called fails then while we don't
commit the disk changes (they are aborted/rolled back) we DO keep the entry cache
> For example, a modrdn operation triggers the referential integrity plugin which
renames the member attribute in some group and changes that group's entry cache entry,
but then later on the memberOf plugin fails for some reason. The database transaction is
aborted, but the entry cache changes that RI plugin did are still present :-( I have also
found other entry cache issues with modrdn and BE TXN plugins, and we know of other
currently non-reproducible entry cache crashes as well related to mishandling of cache
entries after failed operations.
> It's time to rework how we use the entry cache. We basically need a transaction
style caching mechanism - we should not commit any entry cache changes until the original
operation is fully successful. Unfortunately the way the entry cache is currently
designed and used it will be a major change to try to change it.
> William wrote up this doc:
> But this also does not currently cover the nested plugin scenario either (not yet).
I do know how how difficult it would be to implement William's proposal, or how
difficult it would be to incorporate the txn style caching into his design. What kind of
time frame could this even be implemented in? William what are your thoughts?
I like coffee? How cool are planes? My thoughts are simple :)
I think there is a pretty simple mental simplification we can make here though. Nested
transactions “don’t really exist”. We just have *recursive* operations inside of one
Once reframed like that, the entire situation becomes simpler. We have one thread in a
write transaction that can have recursive/batched operations as required, which means that
either “all operations succeed” or “none do”. Really, this is the behaviour we want
anyway, and it’s the transaction model of LMDB and other kv stores that we could consider
(wired tiger, sled in the future).
I think the recursive/nested transaction on the
database level are not
the problem, we do this correctly already, either all or no change
What we do not manage is modifications we do in parallel on the in
memory structure like the entry cache, changes to the EC are not managed
by any txn and I do not see how any of the database txn models would
help, they do not know about ec and can abort changes.
We would need to incorporate the EC into a generic txn model, or have a
way to flag ec entries as garbage for if a txn is aborted
> If William's design is too huge of a change that will take too long to safely
implement then perhaps we need to look into revising the existing cache design where we
use "cache_add_tentative" style functions and only apply them at the end of the
op. This is also not a trivial change.
It’s pretty massive as a change - if we want to do it right. I’d say we need:
* development and testing of a MVCC/COW cache implementation (proof that it really really
* allow “disable/disconnect” of the entry cache, but with the higher level txn’s so that
we can prove the txn semantics are correct
* re-architect our transaction calls so that they are “higher” up. An example is that
internal_modify shouldn’t start a txn, it should be given the current txn state as an arg.
Combined with the above, we can prove we haven’t corrupted our server transaction
* integrate the transactional cache.
I don’t know if I would still write a transactional cache the same way as I proposed in
that design, but I think the ideas are on the right path.
> And what impact would changing the entry cache have on Ludwig's plugable backend
Should be none, it’s seperate layers. If anything this change is going to make Ludwig’s
work better because our current model won’t really take good advantage of the MVCC nature
of modern kv stores.
> Anyway we need to start thinking about redesigning the entry cache - no matter what
approach we want to take. If anyone has any ideas or comments please share them, but I
think due to the severity of this flaw redesigning the entry cache should be one of our
next major goals in DS (1.4.1?).
> 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/
, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Michael Cunningham, Michael O'Neill, Eric