Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Transactional updates

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    1,925

    Default Transactional updates

    I think this doesn't get enough exposure. I just heard about it from reading a tweet by Richard Brown:
    https://twitter.com/sysrich/status/9...38459396079616
    And it looks like it's present in openSUSE for quite some time:
    https://forums.opensuse.org/showthre...tional+updates
    It's a real shame since it looks to be unique feature for openSUSE and something that can be really supported only on our beloved distribution(it looks like this requires BTRFS). Please advertise it more

    Feel free to move this post if this section for it is not appropriate.
    Best regards,
    Greg

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    San Diego, Ca, USA
    Posts
    11,283
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Transactional updates

    Very important,
    And IMO almost impossible to fully understand immediately (I'm still digesting what I've been reading).

    Aside from the broken link,
    The working link links again to another mail list item that likely should be considered currently authoritative, and is the following

    https://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-.../msg00367.html

    I can't remember where at the moment, but sometime maybe a year ago I ran into another situation where a "transaction-update" was implemented... Was that in a containers running on a BSD system? Maybe git? -- I can'r remember for sure. In that case, it also was a maze to understand the details of updating.

    In any case,
    I'm glad to see this despite its many caveats...
    For a long time it's bothered me that a big enough update could be interrupted leading to an unbootable system (on next boot). I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had an upgrade interrupted and wonder if the system would crash or boot successfully next time. Many times I've had a TW in storage and not booted for 9 mths or longer, tried to upgrade and the system was rendered unbootable.

    So,
    It seems that "transaction-update" is a first step to addressing the problem.
    IMO the description that the process is atomic is partially misleading... My experience with atomic transactions (and the definition as I know it) is that if the transaction is unsuccessful, then the transaction is <automatically> rolled back. From what I've read, this does not happen, the flow stops on about step 3 of a 5 or so step process and you have to manually finish the rollback to effect, and in the meantime you're in limbo. IMO automatic rollbacks are an important part of atomicity and if not now then should be a future objective of "transaction-update."

    The existing problems described by Thorsten (the author) are interesting...
    Atomic transactions are usually implemented and described when talking about transforming individual datum whereas the concept is being applied to an entire partition containing many individual files. I don't see the "atomic transaction" applied to individual packages but to a higher level, collection of files, and IMO this is possibly where an improved "transaction-update" needs to be re-designed... With the current approach, it's hard to verify functioning integrity (which is different than file integrity where atomic transactions are more commonly applied), but that is possibly what has to be done... Similar to our current rudimentary package patterns, perhaps subsystems and subsystem functionality need to be clearly identified and if necessary modularized and then each updated/upgraded individually. The result would be literally "biting off only as much as you can chew" so that each subsystem can be upgraded and handled independently of another.


    Anyway...
    That's enough musing for now on what should be a very important new feature,
    TSU
    Beginner Wiki Quickstart - https://en.opensuse.org/User:Tsu2/Quickstart_Wiki
    Solved a problem recently? Create a wiki page for future personal reference!
    Learn something new?
    Attended a computing event?
    Post and Share!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    1,925

    Default Re: Transactional updates

    Quote Originally Posted by tsu2 View Post

    It seems that "transaction-update" is a first step to addressing the problem.
    IMO the description that the process is atomic is partially misleading... My experience with atomic transactions (and the definition as I know it) is that if the transaction is unsuccessful, then the transaction is <automatically> rolled back. From what I've read, this does not happen, the flow stops on about step 3 of a 5 or so step process and you have to manually finish the rollback to effect, and in the meantime you're in limbo. IMO automatic rollbacks are an important part of atomicity and if not now then should be a future objective of "transaction-update."
    Yes I completely agree with you that from what I read the "atomic" part is a bit misleading at least at the moment. But also from what I understand all the issues mentioned by Thorsten can be addressed and then it would be fully atomic. Obviously this requires work in a lot of areas but how will this work happen if nobody knows that such a feature even exists? Even more important is the fact that this is something unique to openSUSE and SUSE and can be a real differentiator.
    Best regards,
    Greg

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •