Pass parameter "transaction" to the Parse Server #1090

mfkenson · 2020-02-15T04:58:03Z

Did I miss anything?

JeromeDeLeon · 2020-02-17T09:35:05Z

src/RESTController.js

@@ -230,6 +232,11 @@ const RESTController = {
      }
    }

+    const transaction = options.transaction;
+    if (transaction) {
+        payload.transaction = true;


You might want to lint your code.

I am quite new to this and don't know what needs to be done exactly. Can you give me some advises how to get started?

Just run npm run lint or yarn lint If you are using yarn in the command line.

Check out the Contributing Guide for all your testing and linting needs.

davimacedo · 2020-02-21T22:29:01Z

Nice! Thanks for contributing. Could you please add a test case?

dplewis · 2020-03-06T14:41:11Z

@davimacedo Can you take this over and add the test cases? You know more about how transactions in parse work better than anyone.

davimacedo · 2020-03-06T20:14:10Z

Sure. I will work on this.

dplewis · 2020-03-22T20:31:23Z

@davimacedo Any updates?

codecov · 2020-03-22T20:32:38Z

Codecov Report

Merging #1090 into master will decrease coverage by 0.07%.
The diff coverage is 42.85%.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master   #1090      +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage   92.28%   92.2%   -0.08%     
=========================================
  Files          54      54              
  Lines        5235    5223      -12     
  Branches     1172    1172              
=========================================
- Hits         4831    4816      -15     
- Misses        404     407       +3

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/ParseObject.js	`89.2% <25%> (-0.4%)`	⬇️
src/RESTController.js	`83.66% <66.66%> (-0.34%)`	⬇️
src/ParseQuery.js	`95.97% <0%> (-0.24%)`	⬇️
src/CryptoController.js	`100% <0%> (+21.42%)`	⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 9a33456...61594b4. Read the comment docs.

davimacedo · 2020-03-23T08:58:47Z

Sorry for the delay. I am working on this now.

davimacedo · 2020-03-23T23:53:50Z

@dplewis @mfkenson I started worked on the tests here but there is a problem with this implementation. In the case you have more objects to be saved/destroyed than the batch size, the SDK will split it in more than one batch and it will be generated two transactions in the server side. I think we can solve it using two different approaches:

Change the sdk to never split into batches when the transaction option is set to true
Throw an error message when the number of objects to be saved/destroyed is bigger than the batch size and the transaction option is set to true.

Thoughts?

dplewis · 2020-03-24T18:06:12Z

@davimacedo I think that would be a great approach. I tried that here and ran into an issue. The issue is that we wouldn't be be able to find cycles in SaveAll if we never split into batches.

davimacedo · 2020-03-26T04:40:32Z

I've just checked this problem and it will be very hard to be solved now. The not saved dependent objects need to go in a first batch because there is no warranty they will be executed in first place in the server side if we send them all together with the objects that depend on them. And if we have more batched sent to the server separately we cannot ensure the transaction. So, to simplify the solution and have a first version of this feature in the next release I suggest we simply do two verifications:

Verify if there is any not saved dependent object when transaction=true and throw an error in the case they exist.
Verify if there are more objects to be saved than the batch size and throw an error in the case there are.

Do you agree @dplewis ?

dplewis · 2020-03-27T14:26:50Z

Thats the only solution I can come up with. We will have to document it well.

andreasanta · 2020-04-06T08:07:55Z

@mfkenson Can you please grant me access to this PR so I can fix linting and maybe try and perform some tests?

@davimacedo Any suggestions on how to start writing tests for this? :)

davimacedo · 2020-04-08T07:51:30Z

Hi guys. I am working on this (to include the validations and the tests) but I found out a bug in Parse Server when deleting objects in a transaction. I am working now on a first PR to Parse Server before fixing this one here.

andreasanta · 2020-04-11T17:54:23Z

@davimacedo Thanks. Please let me know whether I can be of assistance.

vahidalizad · 2021-04-15T12:59:49Z

Hi guys, Great work so far
I really had to use this feature so I came up with the following code:

function getServerUrlPath() {
  let serverUrl = SERVER_URL;
  if (serverUrl[serverUrl.length - 1] !== '/') {
    serverUrl += '/';
  }
  const url = serverUrl.replace(/https?:\/\//, '');
  return url.substr(url.indexOf('/'));
}

const MyCustom = Parse.Object.extend('MyCustom');
let obj1 = new MyCustom({name: 'just a name1'});
let obj2 = new MyCustom({name: 'just a name2'});

let batch = [obj1, obj2];
let options = {};

Parse._request(
  'POST',
  'batch',
  {
    requests: batch.map(obj => {
      const params = obj._getSaveParams();
      params.path = getServerUrlPath() + params.path;
      return params;
    }),
    transaction: true,
  },
  options
)
  .then(res => console.log('success', res))
  .catch(e => console.log('failed', e));

But there is something I don't understand when it fails, it sends up to REQUEST_ATTEMPT_LIMIT retries request but when I save only one file with await obj1.save() it only does it once and log it once. maybe this is because the batch request error does not return Parse.Error and the result has a code above 500.
Is this intended and I have to change REQUEST_ATTEMPT_LIMIT somehow?

davimacedo · 2021-04-16T04:01:18Z

Maybe. You can set it via CoreManager.set('REQUEST_ATTEMPT_LIMIT', retry);

vahidalizad · 2021-04-17T07:14:48Z

Parse.CoreManager.set('REQUEST_ATTEMPT_LIMIT', 1); changes every request retry times to 1 and it works, but there is no way to set a retry value for a single request.
but thanks anyway it works.
Maybe you could change the src/ParseServerRESTController.js in the definition of ParseServerRESTController like bellow to return the error like the normal batch requests

if (path === "/batch") {
    let initialPromise = Promise.resolve();
    if (data.transaction === true) {
    initialPromise = config.database.createTransactionalSession();
    }
    return initialPromise.then(() => {
    const promises = data.requests.map((request) => {
        return handleRequest(
        request.method,
        request.path,
        request.body,
        options,
        config
        ).then(
        (response) => {
            return Promise.resolve({ success: response });
        },
        (error) => {
            return Promise.resolve({
            error: { code: error.code, error: error.message },
            });
        }
        );
    });
    return Promise.all(promises)
        .catch((error) => {
        if (data.transaction === true) {
            return config.database.abortTransactionalSession().then(() => {
            throw error;
            });
        } else {
            throw error;
        }
        })
        .then((result) => {
        if (data.transaction === true) {
            let error = result.find((t) => t.error && t.code);
            if (error) {
            return config.database.abortTransactionalSession().then(() => {
                return error;
            });
            }
            return config.database.commitTransactionalSession().then(() => {
            return result;
            });
        } else {
            return result;
        }
        });
    });
}

In this way not only it would not retry it again, but it also shows the problem as well.
if you are agree with this and don't have the time for it I can create a pull request for it as well.

davimacedo · 2021-04-19T05:21:10Z

That makes sense. Would you be willed to continue this PR?

vahidalizad · 2021-04-19T07:32:40Z

That makes sense. Would you be willed to continue this PR?

Sorry my bad I just checked this FIX: Transaction should only abort when all promises finished #5878 PR and you fixed this problem there but it still lacks a retry option which is always 5 times but it does not log into the server which is ok I guess
I create a fork of the parse-server project and check this one again if it's ok on the master branch I'm gonna join you in this one if you haven't finished it yet.

RahulLanjewar93 · 2023-02-02T06:09:16Z

@davimacedo Hi guys, any updates on this?

araskinwhichbnb · 2023-09-12T20:53:17Z

Its Sep 2023 and there is an ominous comment above that says someone deleted this feature. Does that mean we are not going to get Transactional Integrity in the JS SDK?
@davimacedo

RahulLanjewar93 · 2024-04-23T07:52:19Z

@mfkenson just wanted to know if there's any other pr/issue for reference since you closed this one.

Llorx · 2024-07-16T09:25:13Z

@mfkenson ???

Llorx · 2024-07-16T09:33:01Z

Hi guys. I am working on this (to include the validations and the tests) but I found out a bug in Parse Server when deleting objects in a transaction. I am working now on a first PR to Parse Server before fixing this one here.

@davimacedo Hey, have you fixed this problem? Can I create a new PR with the transaction: true flag now?

vahidalizad · 2024-08-11T22:22:59Z

That makes sense. Would you be willed to continue this PR?

@davimacedo Thank you for your patience! I apologize for the delay. it took me three years to get back to this 😅. I was surprised that this hadn't been completed yet, so I went ahead and created a PR to address it.

Here’s the link to the PR: #2265.

add an option

3eceb4f

JeromeDeLeon suggested changes Feb 17, 2020

View reviewed changes

mfkenson mentioned this pull request Feb 19, 2020

Performing batch transactions #922

Closed

Merge branch 'master' into feature/transaction

61594b4

davimacedo mentioned this pull request Apr 5, 2020

Batch transaction parse-community/parse-server#5849

Merged

dplewis mentioned this pull request Feb 25, 2021

Add sending unsaved ParseObjects to Clients #1256

Open

cbaker6 mentioned this pull request Mar 8, 2021

Add batch transactions parse-community/Parse-Swift#89

Merged

9 tasks

cbaker6 mentioned this pull request Jun 11, 2021

Don't use transactions by default for internal SDK calls parse-community/Parse-Swift#158

Merged

5 tasks

cbaker6 mentioned this pull request Dec 3, 2021

fix: when transactions enabled throw errors when needed parse-community/Parse-Swift#295

Merged

4 tasks

RahulLanjewar93 mentioned this pull request Feb 2, 2023

docs: update incorrect batch size reference parse-community/docs#919

Merged

mfkenson closed this Feb 10, 2023

mfkenson deleted the feature/transaction branch February 10, 2023 02:37

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Pass parameter "transaction" to the Parse Server #1090

Pass parameter "transaction" to the Parse Server #1090

mfkenson commented Feb 15, 2020

JeromeDeLeon Feb 17, 2020

mfkenson Feb 19, 2020

JeromeDeLeon Feb 19, 2020 •

edited

Loading

dplewis Feb 25, 2020

davimacedo commented Feb 21, 2020

dplewis commented Mar 6, 2020

davimacedo commented Mar 6, 2020

dplewis commented Mar 22, 2020

codecov bot commented Mar 22, 2020

davimacedo commented Mar 23, 2020

davimacedo commented Mar 23, 2020

dplewis commented Mar 24, 2020 •

edited

Loading

davimacedo commented Mar 26, 2020

dplewis commented Mar 27, 2020

andreasanta commented Apr 6, 2020

davimacedo commented Apr 8, 2020

andreasanta commented Apr 11, 2020

vahidalizad commented Apr 15, 2021 •

edited

Loading

davimacedo commented Apr 16, 2021

vahidalizad commented Apr 17, 2021 •

edited

Loading

davimacedo commented Apr 19, 2021

vahidalizad commented Apr 19, 2021 •

edited

Loading

RahulLanjewar93 commented Feb 2, 2023

araskinwhichbnb commented Sep 12, 2023

RahulLanjewar93 commented Apr 23, 2024

Llorx commented Jul 16, 2024

Llorx commented Jul 16, 2024

vahidalizad commented Aug 11, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Pass parameter "transaction" to the Parse Server #1090

Pass parameter "transaction" to the Parse Server #1090

Conversation

mfkenson commented Feb 15, 2020

JeromeDeLeon Feb 17, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mfkenson Feb 19, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

JeromeDeLeon Feb 19, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dplewis Feb 25, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

davimacedo commented Feb 21, 2020

dplewis commented Mar 6, 2020

davimacedo commented Mar 6, 2020

dplewis commented Mar 22, 2020

codecov bot commented Mar 22, 2020

Codecov Report

davimacedo commented Mar 23, 2020

davimacedo commented Mar 23, 2020

dplewis commented Mar 24, 2020 • edited Loading

davimacedo commented Mar 26, 2020

dplewis commented Mar 27, 2020

andreasanta commented Apr 6, 2020

davimacedo commented Apr 8, 2020

andreasanta commented Apr 11, 2020

vahidalizad commented Apr 15, 2021 • edited Loading

davimacedo commented Apr 16, 2021

vahidalizad commented Apr 17, 2021 • edited Loading

davimacedo commented Apr 19, 2021

vahidalizad commented Apr 19, 2021 • edited Loading

RahulLanjewar93 commented Feb 2, 2023

araskinwhichbnb commented Sep 12, 2023

RahulLanjewar93 commented Apr 23, 2024

Llorx commented Jul 16, 2024

Llorx commented Jul 16, 2024

vahidalizad commented Aug 11, 2024 • edited Loading

JeromeDeLeon Feb 19, 2020 •

edited

Loading

dplewis commented Mar 24, 2020 •

edited

Loading

vahidalizad commented Apr 15, 2021 •

edited

Loading

vahidalizad commented Apr 17, 2021 •

edited

Loading

vahidalizad commented Apr 19, 2021 •

edited

Loading

vahidalizad commented Aug 11, 2024 •

edited

Loading