fix(electric-db-collection): prevent orphan transactions after must-refetch in progressive mode #1069
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 3d4c962 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
More templates
@tanstack/angular-db
@tanstack/db
@tanstack/db-ivm
@tanstack/electric-db-collection
@tanstack/offline-transactions
@tanstack/powersync-db-collection
@tanstack/query-db-collection
@tanstack/react-db
@tanstack/rxdb-db-collection
@tanstack/solid-db
@tanstack/svelte-db
@tanstack/trailbase-db-collection
@tanstack/vue-db
commit: |
…efetch in progressive mode When a `must-refetch` message is received in progressive mode, it starts a transaction with `begin()` and calls `truncate()`. This resets `hasReceivedUpToDate` to `false`, causing `isBufferingInitialSync()` to return `true`. The bug: subsequent messages after must-refetch were being buffered instead of written to the existing transaction. When `up-to-date` was received, the atomic swap code would create a NEW transaction, leaving the first transaction (from must-refetch) uncommitted forever. This "orphan transaction" caused the collection to become corrupted with undefined values. The fix: Add `&& !transactionStarted` checks to 5 places so that when a transaction is already started (from must-refetch), messages are written directly to it instead of being buffered for atomic swap. 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
ibarakaiev
force-pushed
the
fix/progressive-mode-must-refetch-orphan-transaction
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b1b9572 to
3d4c962
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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.
When a
must-refetchmessage is received in progressive mode, it starts a transaction withbegin()and callstruncate(). This resetshasReceivedUpToDatetofalse, causingisBufferingInitialSync()to returntrue.The bug: subsequent messages after must-refetch were being buffered instead of written to the existing transaction. When
up-to-datewas received, the atomic swap code would create a NEW transaction, leaving the first transaction (from must-refetch) uncommitted forever. This "orphan transaction" caused the collection to become corrupted with undefined values.The fix: Add
&& !transactionStartedchecks to 5 places so that when a transaction is already started (from must-refetch), messages are written directly to it instead of being buffered for atomic swap.🤖 Generated with Claude Code
🚀 Release Impact