[bug-fix] Avoid throwing in catch block for failed commits #15903
+11
−3
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
|
Thanks! |
krlmlr
added a commit
to duckdb/duckdb-r
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 7, 2025
[bug-fix] Avoid throwing in catch block for failed commits (duckdb/duckdb#15903)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I was performing some storage fault injection tests - where storage IO for one database repeatedly error.
I was running into a case - where I was injecting a failure on optimistic write fsync at https://github.com/motherduckdb/duckdb/blob/dad112b203212a590cb764695abf911e93d6ceee/src/transaction/duck_transaction.cpp#L207
The problem is if we see a storage error on WAL truncate at the following - the program will terminate due to throwing an exception in a try/catch.
https://github.com/motherduckdb/duckdb/blob/dad112b203212a590cb764695abf911e93d6ceee/src/transaction/duck_transaction.cpp#L211
I was curious on your thoughts on if the logic was refactored a bit to perform the rollback outside of the original try/catch.
Some questions: