Skip to content

Conversation

meisterT
Copy link
Member

We have seen the transaction to fail, resulting in exceptions/500s.

There is also no need to have a transaction at all. We now do check after the update whether we won instead and if not, tell the judgehost to try again.

Copy link
Contributor

@tuupke tuupke left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

We have seen the transaction to fail, resulting in exceptions/500s.

Part of fixing DOMjudge#2848.

There is also no need to have a transaction at all. We now do check
after the update whether we won instead and if not, tell the judgehost
to try again.

Before this, I could with 4 judgedaemons on my laptop reliably reproduce
the error by just judging the example problems, seeing it ~5 times for
all ~100 submissions. Afterwards, I ran this 10 times and didn't
encounter any error.
@meisterT meisterT enabled auto-merge November 24, 2024 13:42
@meisterT meisterT added this pull request to the merge queue Nov 24, 2024
Merged via the queue into DOMjudge:main with commit 88f7c64 Nov 24, 2024
32 checks passed
@meisterT meisterT deleted the lesstransaction branch November 24, 2024 14:07
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants