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

Fix deadlocks and races when making form variables state consistent #5064

Draft
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

sergei-maertens
Copy link
Member

@sergei-maertens sergei-maertens commented Jan 30, 2025

Closes #5035

Changes

This is essentially a rewrite to make everything consistent in a database transaction and not use Celery tasks which have race and concurrency issues.

Checklist

Check off the items that are completed or not relevant.

  • Impact on features

    • Checked copying a form
    • Checked import/export of a form
    • Config checks in the configuration overview admin page
    • Problem detection in the admin email digest is handled
  • Release management

    • I have labelled the PR as "needs-backport" accordingly
  • I have updated the translations assets (you do NOT need to provide translations)

    • Ran ./bin/makemessages_js.sh
    • Ran ./bin/compilemessages_js.sh
  • Dockerfile/scripts

    • Updated the Dockerfile with the necessary scripts from the ./bin folder
  • Commit hygiene

    • Commit messages refer to the relevant Github issue
    • Commit messages explain the "why" of change, not the how

Before this patch, we ran some reconciliation when a form is edited to
ensure that existing SubmissionValueVariable instances don't have
'null' form_variable foreign keys because the FormVariable set of a
form was updated after editing (a) step(s) - the idea here was to be
eventually consistent. This turns out not to be necessary (if we can
trust our test suite) because the load_submission_value_variables_state
method on the Submission operates on the variable keys rather than
the FK relation and is able to properly resolve everything. This is
also the interface that developers should use when accessing the
submission values and it appears to be done properly in the
registration backends, otherwise tests would likely fail.

This re-coupling was extended in #4900, after it was noticed in #4824
that the re-coupling didn't happen for other forms that use the same
re-usable form definition. At the time, we didn't understand how this
seemingly didn't cause issues or at least didn't result in issues
being reported to us, but we can now conclude that it just wasn't a
problem in the first place because the proper interfaces/service layer
are/were being used and everything is done/reconciled in-memory when
comparing/populating submission variables with form variables.

A further cleanup step will then also be to remove this FK field from
the submission value variable model, as it is not necessary.
@sergei-maertens sergei-maertens added the needs-backport Fix must be backported to stable release branch label Jan 30, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 30, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 96.49123% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 96.70%. Comparing base (934bb7a) to head (3e1c78c).
Report is 2 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/openforms/forms/admin/form_definition.py 60.00% 2 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #5064      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.71%   96.70%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         770      770              
  Lines       26489    26461      -28     
  Branches     3453     3446       -7     
==========================================
- Hits        25618    25589      -29     
- Misses        607      608       +1     
  Partials      264      264              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@sergei-maertens sergei-maertens marked this pull request as draft January 30, 2025 16:27
@sergei-maertens sergei-maertens force-pushed the issue/5058-fix-deadlocks-and-races branch from de3d480 to 7dec89c Compare January 30, 2025 16:31
@@ -47,7 +49,7 @@ def create_for_form(self, form: "Form") -> None:
for form_step in form_steps:
self.create_for_formstep(form_step)

def create_for_formstep(self, form_step: "FormStep") -> list["FormVariable"]:
def create_for_formstep(self, form_step: FormStep) -> list[FormVariable]:
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll manage the overlap in a separate commit, I think this can either be refactored or removed now with synchronize_for

@@ -64,75 +65,6 @@ def test_staff_required(self):

self.assertEqual(status.HTTP_403_FORBIDDEN, response.status_code)

def test_bulk_create_and_update(self):
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this is covered entirely in the new test now

Offloading this to celery results in more, separate tasks each competing
for database locks and can lead to integrity errors.

Changing the business logic of form variable creation/update to
make sure a FormDefinition write results in a sync action gives
a single trigger for these kind of changes, and it's responsible
for updating all the forms that are affected by it.

Since multiple FormDefinition/FormStep writes happen in parallel
because of parallel client requests, we can only update or
create variables and can't delete variables that are not present
in our current form definition, as they may belong to another
request. This shouldn't immediately cause problems, as old,
unused variables don't have an 'execution path'. We piggy
back on the variables bulk update endpoint/transaction to
clean these up, as that call is made after all the form step
persistence succeeded so we know that everything is resolved
by then.

The left-over variables problem only exists when updating a
form step to use a different form definition. It's not
relevant when a form definition is updated through the
admin or a form step is added to a form.
… endpoint

The bulk update endpoint may no longer manage the variables for form
steps, as that's taken care of by the form step endpoint now. But,
user defined variables must still be managed.
Instead of triggering celery tasks, perform the variable state
synchronization for a form in the bulk update endpoint. This
endpoint now still validates the state of all component/user
defined variables, but no longer drops all the variables and
re-creates them, instead it only touches user defined
variables and leaves the form step variables alone.

Since this is called after the steps have been sorted out,
a complete view of left-over variables from earlier
form definitions is available and those can be cleaned
up safely now.
We can express everything now in terms of synchronize_for form_definition.
@sergei-maertens sergei-maertens force-pushed the issue/5058-fix-deadlocks-and-races branch from 7dec89c to 3e1c78c Compare January 30, 2025 17:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
needs-backport Fix must be backported to stable release branch
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

(legacy) Object API registration: json_summary contains "duplicate" nodes
1 participant