Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

MONGOID-5078 Fix shard_key_selector_in_db during post-persist callbacks - DRAFT #4991

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

dalton-braze
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @p and @comandeo,

The mongoid#4985 PR allowed me to tweak my existing solution draft for MONGOID-5078 because of shard_key_selector_in_db being split out of shard_key_selector.

shard_key_selector_in_db is defined as:

# Returns the selector that would match the existing version of this
# document in the database.

This supports the conclusion that shard_key_selector_in_db should contain the updated version of a shard key during "post-persist" callbacks (after_create, after_save, after_update, after_upsert, etc). The current incorrect behavior is that shard_key_selector_in_db returns the old value of a shard key during "post-persist" callbacks which are triggered by updating a shard key.

The potential solution I designed adds a single instance variable, @during_post_persist_callbacks, to each Mongoid::Document. This instance variable is read by shard_key_selector_in_db to determine if it should return a sharded field's internally cached previous value or its current value.

This PR is intended as a draft (especially the example tests I wrote). I am hoping to use it as a jumping-off point for discussing the solution to this behavior in more detail. I'd love to hear what you think.

For a much deeper level of detail, check out my original open PR here.

@dalton-braze
Copy link
Contributor Author

I am converting this PR to "non-draft mode" because it won't assign reviewers otherwise.

@dalton-braze dalton-braze marked this pull request as ready for review April 29, 2021 07:20
@agolin95 agolin95 added the tracked-in-jira Ticket filed in Mongo's Jira system label May 3, 2021
@johnnyshields
Copy link
Contributor

johnnyshields commented Jul 27, 2021

@dalton-braze wouldn't it be better to set new_record = false at this stage, since the record is actually persisted? That seems cleaner than introducing a new flag, though it may break some after_save etc. behavior in existing apps. It could be released as part of a major upgrade.

@dalton-braze
Copy link
Contributor Author

@dalton-braze wouldn't it be better to set new_record = false at this stage, since the record is actually persisted? That seems cleaner than introducing a new flag, though it may break some after_save etc. behavior in existing apps. It could be released as part of a major upgrade.

@johnnyshields, would you be able to clarify your suggestion?

How I'm parsing it, I'm not seeing how changing the point-in-time that new_record is set to false will fix the bug identified by this PR? The goal of the PR is to make shard_key_selector_in_db return the currently persisted value of a Mongoid::Document shard key during post-persist callbacks, after the value of the shard key has been initially-set/modified.

The key section of this PR is the following updated method:

def shard_key_selector_in_db
  selector = {}
  shard_key_fields.each do |field|
    selector[field.to_s] = new_record? || during_post_persist_callbacks ? send(field) : attribute_was(field)
  end
  selector
end

If my explanation feels ambiguous, I'd suggest checking out the repro test cases I've written in spec/mongoid/reloadable_spec.rb, specifically in context "when using sharded documents"


As for how new_record? should actually behave, that's a better question for someone a lot more familiar with the Mongoid codebase than I am :)

@johnnyshields
Copy link
Contributor

@dalton-braze sorry my comment was mistaken, please ignore.

@johnnyshields
Copy link
Contributor

@comandeo this might be a good one for you to look at given your expertise with after_* callbacks

@comandeo
Copy link
Contributor

comandeo commented Apr 5, 2022

@johnnyshields @dalton-braze The issue seems to be fixed here - 9fa2cc3

I think we can close this PR.

@johnnyshields
Copy link
Contributor

johnnyshields commented Apr 5, 2022

@comandeo can we merge in just the tests from this PR? (or tests that demonstrate the fix, in other words)

@Neilshweky
Copy link
Contributor

@comandeo mind taking a look here again and deciding if we could close this one?

@johnnyshields
Copy link
Contributor

johnnyshields commented Oct 3, 2022

@Neilshweky the problem here is certainly a legitimate one for users who use sharding. Ticket should be kept open.

@johnnyshields
Copy link
Contributor

@jamis @comandeo can we verify the fix here and move forward?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
dmitry-todo tracked-in-jira Ticket filed in Mongo's Jira system
Projects
None yet
6 participants