database: prohibit PUT of source data that would lead to conflict #168
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
srenatus
force-pushed
the
sr/qstmlyywlskq
branch
5 times, most recently
from
a4f46e4 to
f1c6f18
Compare
srenatus
commented
Oct 31, 2025
| @@ -0,0 +1,128 @@ | |||
| package sourcedatafs | |||
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The correct answer is always one more filesystem
srenatus
force-pushed
the
sr/zoorstqmswmk
branch
4 times, most recently
from
2ce8c72 to
29c03d7
Compare
See #141. Previously, it was possible to create a state in the database that would unconditionally fail when we tried to build a bundle from that. Now, any PUT will be validated against the current state of the database. Signed-off-by: Stephan Renatus <[email protected]>
Note that we currently still hold on to it, so we need to be able to keep all the (raw JSON) data in memory. Let's figure out a better way... Signed-off-by: Stephan Renatus <[email protected]>
This should let us avoid dealing with most of the files most of the time. Signed-off-by: Stephan Renatus <[email protected]>
But this seems to take forever for my 12k files experiment. I'll explore returning the relevant prefixed files instead. (It takes 5 min to load the 12k files on-the-fly.) Signed-off-by: Stephan Renatus <[email protected]>
srenatus
force-pushed
the
sr/qstmlyywlskq
branch
6 times, most recently
from
f035b95 to
1ca846f
Compare
This might be a good compromise between extra effort and usability. Signed-off-by: Stephan Renatus <[email protected]>
srenatus
force-pushed
the
sr/qstmlyywlskq
branch
from
1ca846f to
f501f32
Compare
srenatus
commented
Nov 4, 2025
|
|
||
| // deal with (1.), downwards conflicts | ||
| // NB(sr): We don't need to consult the data itself to determine errors here, | ||
| // so we only check existing paths. |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Turns out this is too restrictive. There are valid data combinations that this model refuses, for example:
users/admins/alice/data.json: {"name": "Alice"}
users/data.json: {"admins": {"bob": "foo"}}
In that order, the PUT of the second request would be forbidden. If ordered the other way around, it would work. This isn't good. 😵 Back to the drawing table.
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.
See #141.
Previously, it was possible to create a state in the database that would unconditionally fail when we tried to build a bundle from that. Now, any PUT will be validated against the current state of the database.