On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 09:59:44AM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > Matt Domsch wrote: >> On Sun, Nov 25, 2007 at 09:08:30PM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: >>>> +1, but does it make sure all transactions are finished? I know smolt >>>> does not have good transaction protection. If a transaction fails >>>> halfway through, we might have a mess. >>>> >>> Not if the app doesn't. From a brief test, TG apps do not do this. >> >> MirrorManager doesn't use transactions, I never figured out how to get >> them to work right. Advice welcome. >> > By not being able to get transactions working, do you mean explicit > transactions or implicit transactions? I see that mirrormanager, bodhi, > and noc (not running currently) are using a dburi that disables implicit > transactions:: > mirrormanager-prod.cfg.erb: > sqlobject.dburi="notrans_postgres://mirroradmin: > <%= mirrorPassword %>@db2.fedora.phx.redhat.com/mirrormanager" > > If that was changed to:: > sqlobject.dburi="postgres://mirroradmin:[...] > > TurboGears would at least attempt to use an implicit transaction per http > request which should protect the database from shutting down the > application in the middle of processing a multi-table update. I don't know > if that's the problem you're referring to, though. Removing the notrans_postgres:// from bodhi's sqlobject.dburi causes problems. Modifications don't seem to go through; I'm not sure if they hit the DB or not. I remember encountering this issue early on in bodhi development, and it was mitigated by calling hub.sync() all over the place. I have since removed them, and use notrans_postgres, which has been working fine since day 1 of our production instance. I'm not a db guru, so I'm not sure which is better or worse. I'll have to investigate this further. luke _______________________________________________ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
