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

[Siôn Lloyd]

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.

Sion