SQLite-based read-write lock #399
Draft
Conversation
This file contains 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
gaborbernat
reviewed
Feb 19, 2025
src/filelock/_read_write.py
Outdated
| super().__init__(lock_file, timeout, blocking) | ||
| self.procLock = threading.Lock() | ||
| self.con = sqlite3.connect(self._context.lock_file, check_same_thread=False) | ||
| # Redundant unless there are "rogue" processes that open the db |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please align comments to 120 charachters 🙇
gaborbernat
reviewed
Feb 19, 2025
src/filelock/_read_write.py
Outdated
|
|
||
|
|
||
| class _SQLiteLock(BaseFileLock): | ||
| def __init__(self, lock_file: str | os.PathLike[str], timeout: float = -1, blocking: bool = True) -> None: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Prefer
from os import PathLike
|
@gaborbernat I've pushed a more "serious" attempt. |
gaborbernat
requested changes
Feb 24, 2025
|
@gaborbernat what do you think about using SQLite's VFS interface directly, without the "dummy database" thing? https://github.com/rogerbinns/apsw provides bindings |
|
It's important that we have no dependencies. The only alternative could be
to hide this functionality behind some extra, I do not know how widely
available the bindings are in form of wheels.
…On Mon, Feb 24, 2025, 21:58 Roman Leventov ***@***.***> wrote:
@gaborbernat <https://github.com/gaborbernat> what do you think about
using SQLite's VFS interface <https://www.sqlite.org/vfs.html> directly,
without the "dummy database" thing? https://github.com/rogerbinns/apsw
provides bindings
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#399 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFIQPULETXMCF2DNC5TAZD2RQA7HAVCNFSM6AAAAABXO35KTOVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDMOBQGY4TIOBZG4>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
[image: leventov]*leventov* left a comment (tox-dev/filelock#399)
<#399 (comment)>
@gaborbernat <https://github.com/gaborbernat> what do you think about
using SQLite's VFS interface <https://www.sqlite.org/vfs.html> directly,
without the "dummy database" thing? https://github.com/rogerbinns/apsw
provides bindings
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#399 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFIQPULETXMCF2DNC5TAZD2RQA7HAVCNFSM6AAAAABXO35KTOVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDMOBQGY4TIOBZG4>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
|
@gaborbernat I've added tests. If you want to finesse API (context managers vs. parameters to acquire_read() and acquire_write() methods; are read_lock() and write_lock() methods even needed? Are instance's default timeout and blocking needed?), docs, formatting, class/method naming, etc., could you please do it yourself to your liking? |
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.
Draft for #307.
@gaborbernat @Yard1 please let me know how I should change the code from the API perspective. There are quite a bit very elaborate stuff that is hard to understand regarding thread-locals, etc.