-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6
fix: write compilation database atomically #37
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
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On Windows, replacing an existing database with
os.Renamefails with a sharing violation whenever another process has the file open withoutFILE_SHARE_DELETE; a normal Goos.Openreader is one example. The previous in-placeos.Createpath could still update the file when that reader allowedFILE_SHARE_WRITE, so an IDE, indexer, or other database consumer holding the file open can now make the supported Windows CLI terminate without updating it. Retry the replacement or fall back to an in-place write for this Windows error.AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L48-L48
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@codex review
▏ The Windows sharing-violation scenario is valid, but falling back to an in-place truncate/write would reintroduce the partial-JSON race this change is intended to eliminate. When replacement is blocked, the current implementation
▏ preserves the complete old database, removes the staged file, and returns an error. Windows replacement is intentionally best-effort because a handle opened without FILE_SHARE_DELETE makes atomic replacement impossible. A retry
▏ would only help transient readers and cannot guarantee progress for long-lived handles
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@codex review