Hacktoberfest 2026:维护者为十月标记出来的 issue,仍然开放、适合新手。 浏览 Hacktoberfest issue

SQLite persistence: a sync transaction whose durable write fails still changes the public Collection

未关闭
#2,210 0 条评论 0 个 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 查看

维护者通常 1 天内回复

还没有人认领这个 Issue。

评估

难度
4/5
预计耗时
3-5 天
新手友好度
48/100
Issue 类型
缺陷
描述清晰度
描述清楚
活跃度
活跃
技术栈
sqlite, typescript
领域
database, testing

调研方向

Start in packages/db-sqlite-persistence-core/src/persisted.ts and trace how the real SQLite adapter handles a rejected applyCommittedTx on the sync-present path; compare it with the no-sync path and coordinator path described in the issue. Then locate the SQLite persistence oracles and add a receiving case that makes a durable sync delete fail through the real adapter. Done means the receipt rejects, status is error, and public rows still match the rows stored in SQLite.

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。

描述

  • I've validated the bug against the latest version of DB packages

Validated on main at 31dad2dd3: @tanstack/db 0.15.1, @tanstack/db-sqlite-persistence-core 0.4.11, @tanstack/node-db-sqlite-persistence 0.2.36, @tanstack/query-db-collection 1.4.7, Node 24.19.0, macOS.

Describe the bug

On a SQLite-persisted collection with a sync source, a sync transaction whose durable SQLite write fails is still applied to the public Collection. The commit receipt rejects with PersistedCollectionDurabilityError and the Collection enters error, but the transaction's delete has already removed the row from collection.keys(). SQLite still stores the row. After the failure, the public Collection and durable storage disagree.

The glossary defines an accepted sync transaction as one "that core, or a wrapping sync after its durable step, has taken". A transaction whose durable step fails is not accepted, so none of its changes should become visible.

To Reproduce

A self-contained Vitest repro. A SQLite trigger makes the second transaction's delete fail inside SQLite. I ran it in the monorepo with the database from new BetterSqlite3SQLiteDriver({ filename: ':memory:' }).getDatabase(); it is shown here with better-sqlite3 directly:

import Database from 'better-sqlite3'
import { createCollection } from '@tanstack/db'
import type { SyncConfig } from '@tanstack/db'
import {
  createNodeSQLitePersistence,
  persistedCollectionOptions,
} from '@tanstack/node-db-sqlite-persistence'
import { expect, it } from 'vitest'

type Item = { id: string; name: string }
type SyncParams = Parameters<SyncConfig<Item, string>[`sync`]>[0]

it(`keeps a row public when its sync delete fails to persist`, async () => {
  const database = new Database(`:memory:`)
  let sync!: SyncParams
  const collection = createCollection(
    persistedCollectionOptions<Item, string>({
      id: `durable-delete-failure`,
      getKey: (item: Item) => item.id,
      sync: {
        sync: (params: SyncParams) => {
          sync = params
          params.begin()
          params.write({ type: `insert`, value: { id: `a`, name: `A` } })
          params.write({ type: `insert`, value: { id: `b`, name: `B` } })
          params.commit()
          params.markReady()
        },
      },
      persistence: createNodeSQLitePersistence({ database }),
    }),
  )
  await collection.preload()

  // Make the next durable delete fail inside SQLite.
  const { tbl_name: table } = database
    .prepare(
      `select tbl_name from sqlite_master where type = 'trigger' and name like '%_key_evidence_delete'`,
    )
    .get() as { tbl_name: string }
  const storedRows = () =>
    (database.prepare(`select count(*) as n from ${table}`).get() as { n: number }).n
  database.exec(
    `create trigger fail_delete before delete on ${table} begin select raise(abort, 'storage failed'); end`,
  )

  sync.begin()
  sync.write({ type: `delete`, key: `a` })
  const outcome = await Promise.resolve(sync.commit()).then(
    () => `applied`,
    (error: unknown) => (error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)),
  )
  await new Promise((resolve) => setTimeout(resolve, 10))

  expect({
    outcome,
    status: collection.status,
    publicRows: [...collection.keys()].sort(),
    storedRows: storedRows(),
  }).toEqual({
    outcome: `Failed to durably persist collection "durable-delete-failure": storage failed`,
    status: `error`,
    publicRows: [`a`, `b`], // actual: [`b`]
    storedRows: 2,
  })
})

Observed:

{"outcome":"Failed to durably persist collection \"durable-delete-failure\": storage failed","status":"error","publicRows":["b"],"storedRows":2}

Expected behavior

The receipt rejects and the Collection enters error, which already happens. The public Collection keeps showing the last durable state, ["a", "b"], because the delete never became durable.

Where it does and does not happen

All of these used one in-memory better-sqlite3 database and one sync transaction that deletes a:

Path Public rows after the failure Stored rows Status
Sync source, createNodeSQLitePersistence (managed, sync-present) ["b"] (wrong) 2 error
Sync source, resolvePersistenceForCollection({ mode: 'sync-present' }) ["b"] (wrong) 2 error
Sync source, { adapter } from the Node persistence, no coordinator ["b"] (wrong) 2 error
No sync source (sync-absent), local collection.delete('a') ["a", "b"] 2 error
Query DB collection (a sync source) over a hand-written in-memory PersistenceAdapter whose applyCommittedTx rejects, either at once or after 5 ms row kept row kept error

So this is specific to the sync-present path when the real SQLite adapter fails. A fake adapter that rejects from applyCommittedTx does not reproduce it, even when the rejection is delayed, so the difference is in what the SQLite adapter path does around the failed write, not in timing. I have not found the root cause.

How it surfaces through Query DB

The same path affects @tanstack/query-db-collection with SQLite persistence (syncMode: 'on-demand', persistedGcTime: 0). Load a subset, make SQLite reject the delete, then call unloadSubset. The released row disappears from the public Collection, a peer subset's row stays, SQLite keeps both rows, and the Collection enters error. A later loadSubset rejects with the same durability error. After cleanup() and preload(), the restarted Collection serves the row from storage again, and a successful release removes it from both the Collection and storage. Query DB's own ownership oracle uses a controlled adapter, which keeps the row public, so it cannot see this. See the open cells in the stale reacquisition review record from #2206.

Additional context

  • The durability error comes from toPersistedCollectionDurabilityError (via SingleProcessCoordinator.requestApplyCommittedTx or the direct applyCommittedTx path in packages/db-sqlite-persistence-core/src/persisted.ts). Both report the failure correctly; the question is why the transaction's changes have already reached core state by then on the SQLite path.
  • The Collection is terminal after the failure, so the stale view lasts only until a restart. Until then, reads, live queries, and subscribers see a row as deleted that storage still holds, and a host that keeps rendering the last state shows the wrong rows.
  • A fix should come with a receiving witness in the SQLite persistence oracles that fails a durable sync write through the real adapter and compares public rows with stored rows. As far as I can tell, no current oracle owns that case.
主要语言
TypeScript
星标
4k
派生
277
平均合并
17 小时 40 分钟
30 天内合并 PR
223

环境准备

从这里开始

  1. 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
  3. Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
  4. 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。

TanStack/db 的其他 Issue

查看 TanStack/db 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 TypeScript Issue

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。