qa: Verify DBWrapper iterators are taking snapshots #11422
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
sipa
reviewed
Sep 29, 2017
src/test/dbwrapper_tests.cpp
Outdated
| @@ -204,19 +204,33 @@ BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(iterator_ordering) | |||
| for (int x=0x00; x<256; ++x) { | |||
| uint8_t key = x; | |||
| uint32_t value = x*x; | |||
| BOOST_CHECK(dbw.Write(key, value)); | |||
| if (!(x & 1)) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can I haz braces before indenting?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, but I fixed it anyway :p.
|
edit: ACK bb8376b |
The LevelDB docs seem to indicate that an iterator will not take snapshots (even providing instructions on how to do so yourself). In several of the places we use them, we assume snapshots to have been taken. In order to make sure LevelDB doesn't change out from under us (and to prevent the next person who reads the docs from having the same fright I did), verify that snapshots are taken in our tests.
517ec72 to
bb8376b
Compare
|
Yes, iterators not changing under us is an important part of our leveldb usage. I remember in the past this was well-documented. I wonder when they changed the documentation to no longer say this, and what their plans here are? In any case it's good to check. |
laanwj
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 2, 2017
bb8376b Verify DBWrapper iterators are taking snapshots (Matt Corallo) Pull request description: The LevelDB docs seem to indicate that an iterator will not take snapshots (even providing instructions on how to do so yourself). In several of the places we use them, we assume snapshots to have been taken. In order to make sure LevelDB doesn't change out from under us (and to prevent the next person who reads the docs from having the same fright I did), verify that snapshots are taken in our tests. Tree-SHA512: 54f24dabc294962e9c20882f61809604421a661208d1568bb107102248603e8e7c12e929ccb0812a73d4e4f23fea61f1b48e7cc24da5a7260f1d14d89ba88cd6
maflcko
pushed a commit
to maflcko/bitcoin-core
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 3, 2017
The LevelDB docs seem to indicate that an iterator will not take snapshots (even providing instructions on how to do so yourself). In several of the places we use them, we assume snapshots to have been taken. In order to make sure LevelDB doesn't change out from under us (and to prevent the next person who reads the docs from having the same fright I did), verify that snapshots are taken in our tests. Github-Pull: bitcoin#11422 Rebased-From: bb8376b
jasonbcox
pushed a commit
to Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-abc
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 16, 2019
Summary: bb8376b Verify DBWrapper iterators are taking snapshots (Matt Corallo) Pull request description: The LevelDB docs seem to indicate that an iterator will not take snapshots (even providing instructions on how to do so yourself). In several of the places we use them, we assume snapshots to have been taken. In order to make sure LevelDB doesn't change out from under us (and to prevent the next person who reads the docs from having the same fright I did), verify that snapshots are taken in our tests. Tree-SHA512: 54f24dabc294962e9c20882f61809604421a661208d1568bb107102248603e8e7c12e929ccb0812a73d4e4f23fea61f1b48e7cc24da5a7260f1d14d89ba88cd6 Backport of Core PR11422 bitcoin/bitcoin#11422 Test Plan: make check Reviewers: deadalnix, Fabien, jasonbcox, O1 Bitcoin ABC, #bitcoin_abc Reviewed By: Fabien, jasonbcox, O1 Bitcoin ABC, #bitcoin_abc Differential Revision: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D3858
codablock
pushed a commit
to codablock/dash
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 24, 2019
bb8376b Verify DBWrapper iterators are taking snapshots (Matt Corallo) Pull request description: The LevelDB docs seem to indicate that an iterator will not take snapshots (even providing instructions on how to do so yourself). In several of the places we use them, we assume snapshots to have been taken. In order to make sure LevelDB doesn't change out from under us (and to prevent the next person who reads the docs from having the same fright I did), verify that snapshots are taken in our tests. Tree-SHA512: 54f24dabc294962e9c20882f61809604421a661208d1568bb107102248603e8e7c12e929ccb0812a73d4e4f23fea61f1b48e7cc24da5a7260f1d14d89ba88cd6
barrystyle
pushed a commit
to PACGlobalOfficial/PAC
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 22, 2020
bb8376b Verify DBWrapper iterators are taking snapshots (Matt Corallo) Pull request description: The LevelDB docs seem to indicate that an iterator will not take snapshots (even providing instructions on how to do so yourself). In several of the places we use them, we assume snapshots to have been taken. In order to make sure LevelDB doesn't change out from under us (and to prevent the next person who reads the docs from having the same fright I did), verify that snapshots are taken in our tests. Tree-SHA512: 54f24dabc294962e9c20882f61809604421a661208d1568bb107102248603e8e7c12e929ccb0812a73d4e4f23fea61f1b48e7cc24da5a7260f1d14d89ba88cd6
random-zebra
added a commit
to PIVX-Project/PIVX
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 23, 2021
bc3d3fa Add testcase to simulate bitcoin schema in leveldb (MapleLaker) 4f15155 Verify DBWrapper iterators are taking snapshots (Matt Corallo) 36b407e test: Replace remaining sprintf with snprintf (Wladimir J. van der Laan) e8cb38a Add test for dbwrapper iterators with same-prefix keys. (Matt Corallo) 4a4ddb8 test: Add more thorough test for dbwrapper iterators I made a silly mistake in a database wrapper where keys were sorted by char instead of uint8_t. As x86 char is signed the sorting for the block index database was messed up, resulting in a segfault due to missing records. (Wladimir J. van der Laan) 109446f chain: Add assertion in case of missing records in index db (Wladimir J. van der Laan) Pull request description: Back ported the following PRs from upstream (adaptations were needed because we aren't obfuscating the db): * bitcoin#7992. * bitcoin#9867. * bitcoin#11422. * bitcoin#17206 ACKs for top commit: random-zebra: Nice! ACK bc3d3fa Tree-SHA512: ebd811d7ee0d970247ceec2624e524df7611274f36ef7c0252712ebf247828ee091dcc6872585271fac3d7846127a997a856d7cd72eb20425e06213207ff1c7a
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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.
The LevelDB docs seem to indicate that an iterator will not take
snapshots (even providing instructions on how to do so yourself).
In several of the places we use them, we assume snapshots to have
been taken.
In order to make sure LevelDB doesn't change out from under us
(and to prevent the next person who reads the docs from having the
same fright I did), verify that snapshots are taken in our tests.