[Opendnssec-develop] Minutes of 2012-08-07

Siôn Lloyd sion at nominet.org.uk
Wed Aug 8 08:00:24 UTC 2012

On 08/08/12 08:30, Jerry Lundström wrote:
> Hi all,
> These are my comments on yesterday meeting:
> 2.
> - Sion explains that not all (older) SQLite installs supported
> transactional behaviour.  So we've surrounded it with another lock.
> This may run into a race condition in some situations.  Whether an
> install is transactional is not easily deduced by looking at it, or
> querying parameters.
> Actually looks like transactions has been around in SQLite since 2001
> / v2.0 so all SQLite installations today do support transactional
> behavior.
> Just because you have transaction does not mean you can't get dead
> locks, its more the other way around that because of transaction you
> do get dead locks. This is more a matter of database design, SQL usage
> and the type of transaction locking the database engine does
> (database/table/row/column etc).

Transactions guarantee that your work is "all or nothing". Locking 
prevents concurrent processes from updating the same row of a table at 
the same time.

At the time it was being written it was not clear which distributions 
were setting the locking style compile time flag correctly. (If I recall 
correctly we were seeing issues on solaris, but then we are possibly 
taking about solaris 8?..)

> 5.
> - Sion adds some concern about duplicating code, as the broad setup of
> each test is often the same.

To be clear I am not too worried about duplicating code. What I was 
saying was that the one test I wrote was largely "cut 'n' paste"; and if 
we are asking folk who are not so familiar with the tests to write some 
it would be useful to have a clip board of code snippets and some 
template tests that can form the starting point.

That said, utility functions that can be called would make the tests 
more readable.


More information about the Opendnssec-develop mailing list