Skip to content

Clarify persistence order requirements for async persistence #3951

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

Conversation

TheBlueMatt
Copy link
Collaborator

Specifically, we do not want to imply any persistence order requirements for writes to different keys, but also we don't want to allow state reversions, even if only temporary.

Specifically, we do not want to imply any persistence order
requirements for writes to different keys, but also we don't want
to allow state reversions, even if only temporary.
@ldk-reviews-bot
Copy link

ldk-reviews-bot commented Jul 23, 2025

I've assigned @joostjager as a reviewer!
I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.
Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 23, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.93%. Comparing base (ebe571a) to head (a354995).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3951      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   88.93%   88.93%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         168      168              
  Lines      121962   121962              
  Branches   121962   121962              
==========================================
- Hits       108471   108466       -5     
+ Misses      11088    11087       -1     
- Partials     2403     2409       +6     
Flag Coverage Δ
fuzzing 22.70% <ø> (ø)
tests 88.75% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Copy link
Contributor

@joostjager joostjager left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good clarification.

@ldk-reviews-bot
Copy link

👋 The first review has been submitted!

Do you think this PR is ready for a second reviewer? If so, click here to assign a second reviewer.

@joostjager joostjager merged commit f246159 into lightningdevkit:main Jul 24, 2025
28 checks passed
Copy link
Contributor

@tnull tnull left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

post-merge ACK

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.

4 participants