You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Debate-map should be more resilient to concurrent update commands. (which sometimes cause claimminer map generations to fail)
So for example:
We could reduce the isolation level for the transactions, eg. from Serializable to Repeatable Read. (perhaps selectively, when just updating the user's edit-count?)
Or we could change the way that "edit count" is stored, to reduce the chance/possibility of contention. (eg. postgres might have a native way to increment a number in a way that never has concurrency errors)
Or (for this specific case) a fix would also be to not update that "edit count" value when claim-miner is doing it for a map generation.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
MS the commands that increment edit-counts (of user and/or map) have a new field in their "input" structure called "incrementEdits", which allows for that edit-incrementing to be disabled.
Once claim-miner is updated to use the fields above (disabling edit-count incrementing during its import-related commands), this immediate problem should be fixed. (may still want to resolve it in a deeper way down the road)
Venryx
changed the title
Fix that claimminer map generations sometimes fail, due to concurrency error
Find a deeper fix for postgres concurrency issues, re. multiple commands updating a map's/user's edit-count
Jul 24, 2024
Debate-map should be more resilient to concurrent update commands. (which sometimes cause claimminer map generations to fail)
So for example:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: