feat(spanner): add support for snapshot isolation by alkatrivedi · Pull Request #2245 · googleapis/nodejs-spanner

alkatrivedi · 2025-03-06T13:51:05Z

This PR contains code changes to add support for option IsolationLevel at the client level and at the transaction level.
supported methods are(RW and Blind Write):

- writeAtLeastOnce
- runTransactionAsync
- runTransaction
- getTransaction
- async getTransaction(from transaction runner class)

See https://github.com/googleapis/repo-automation-bots/blob/main/packages/owl-bot/README.md

…s/nodejs-spanner into isolation-level-option

surbhigarg92 · 2025-03-12T09:52:42Z

+  /**
+   * Use option isolationLevel to add the isolation level in the transaction.
+   */
+  setIsolationLevel(isolationLevel: any): void {


Don't use any here. Use protos.google.spanner.v1.TransactionOptions.IsolationLevel

updated, thanks for the suggestion!

Is this method used anywhere now ?

surbhigarg92 · 2025-03-12T09:55:08Z

 }

+export interface WriteAtLeastOnceOptions extends CallOptions {
+  defaultTransactionOptions?: Pick<RunTransactionOptions, 'isolationLevel'>;


why didn't we have change_stream here, it creates a RW transaction

will add that option in a separate PR, it got skipped earlier

surbhigarg92 · 2025-03-12T09:56:43Z

+        if (options.isolationLevel) {
+          transaction!.setIsolationLevel(options.isolationLevel);
+        } else if (defaultTransactionOptions) {
+          transaction!.setIsolationLevel(
+            defaultTransactionOptions.isolationLevel
+          );
+        }


This code along with below code is getting repeated. Create a method in transaction.ts as setReadWriteTransactionOptions and move the code there

if (options.optimisticLock) { transaction!.useOptimisticLock(); } if (options.excludeTxnFromChangeStreams) { transaction!.excludeTxnFromChangeStreams(); }```

surbhigarg92 · 2025-03-12T10:01:28Z

 interface MutateRowsOptions extends CommitOptions {
  requestOptions?: Omit<IRequestOptions, 'requestTag'>;
-  excludeTxnFromChangeStreams?: boolean;
+  defaultTransactionOptions?: Pick<


This is a breaking change

surbhigarg92 · 2025-03-17T07:23:11Z

-          transaction!.excludeTxnFromChangeStreams();
-        }
+        transaction?.setReadWriteTransactionOptions(
+          options && Object.keys(options).length


How would this handle the case, when TransactionOptions only has excludeTxnFromChangeStreams set and isolation_level needs to be taken from defaultTransactionOptions

surbhigarg92 · 2025-03-17T07:38:36Z

 import {Database} from './database';
 import {google} from '../protos/protos';
 import IRequestOptions = google.spanner.v1.IRequestOptions;
+import {protos} from '.';


import {google} from '../protos/protos' is already imported.

You could import IsolationLevel on top like IRequestOptions

import IsolationLevel = google.spanner.v1.TransactionOptions.IsolationLevel

done, thanks for the suggestion!

surbhigarg92 · 2025-03-17T07:39:19Z

  requestOptions?: Pick<IRequestOptions, 'transactionTag'>;
  optimisticLock?: boolean;
  excludeTxnFromChangeStreams?: boolean;
+  isolationLevel?: protos.google.spanner.v1.TransactionOptions.IsolationLevel;


Use the IsolationLevel import instead of the full syntax.

surbhigarg92 · 2025-03-17T07:39:35Z

+    const defaults = {
+      timeout: 3600000,
+      isolationLevel:
+        protos.google.spanner.v1.TransactionOptions.IsolationLevel


Change it here and all other places.

surbhigarg92 · 2025-03-17T07:41:09Z

+    transaction!.setReadWriteTransactionOptions(
+      this.options && Object.keys(this.options).length
+        ? this.options
+        : this.session.parent._getSpanner().defaultTransactionOptions


Do not use _getSpanner() private method . Instead create a private method _getSpanner in this class and use it. Refer this method in all other classes

have refactored the code, please check

surbhigarg92 · 2025-03-17T07:41:36Z


    this._queuedMutations = [];
    this._options = {readWrite: options};
+    this._options.isolationLevel =


Similarly change the import and protos full path

surbhigarg92 · 2025-03-17T07:42:10Z

+    /**
+     * Set isolation level .
+     */
+    if (options?.isolationLevel) {


how would this use the default isolation level if available ?

I have updated the code
in the Transaction class constructor we are assigning the default isolationLevel value as this._options.isolationLevel = IsolationLevel.ISOLATION_LEVEL_UNSPECIFIED;

now here in this case this._options.isolationLevel = options?.isolationLevel? options?.isolationLevel:this._getSpanner().defaultTransactionOptions.isolationLevel;

if the isolationLevel will get pass at the transaction level it will assign that value to the this._options.isolationLevel otherwise this value this._getSpanner().defaultTransactionOptions.isolationLevel will get assign which if being passed from spanner options will use that value otherwise it will also be containing default value of unspecified

surbhigarg92 · 2025-03-17T07:42:42Z

+  /**
+   * Use option isolationLevel to add the isolation level in the transaction.
+   */
+  setIsolationLevel(isolationLevel: any): void {


Is this method used anywhere now ?

surbhigarg92 · 2025-03-17T07:48:24Z

+      assert.strictEqual(options, fakeOptions);
+    });
+
+    it('should optionally accept `option` isolationLevel when passed with Spanner options', () => {


Add test cases for below

Should override isolationLevel from runTransactionOptions, when passed in both defaultTransactionOptions and runTransactionOptions

Should use isolation level from defaultTransactionOptions when runTransactionOptions are passed but does not consists of isolation level and contains other properties. The resulting options should be a combination of defaultTransactionOptions and runTransactionOptions

If defaultTransactionOptions has more properties except, isolation level, then other properties should be ignored.

have added the below tests in spanner.ts

'should be able to use isolationLevel from Spanner Option when other options are passed at transaction level'

'should override isolationLevel from Spanner Option when passed at transaction level'

surbhigarg92 · 2025-03-20T05:44:17Z

        span.addEvent('Using Session', {'session.id': session?.id});
        this._releaseOnEnd(session!, transaction!, span);
        try {
+          transaction!.setReadWriteTransactionOptions(options);


Suggested change

transaction!.setReadWriteTransactionOptions(options);

transaction!.setReadWriteTransactionOptions(options as RunTransactionOptions);

Do this for all other places

This PR contains code changes to add support for option IsolationLevel at the client level and at the transaction level. supported methods are(RW and Blind Write): ``` - writeAtLeastOnce - runTransactionAsync - runTransaction - getTransaction - async getTransaction(from transaction runner class) ```

* feat(spanner): support for Multiplexed Session Partitioned Ops * feat(spanner): add support for snapshot isolation (#2245) This PR contains code changes to add support for option IsolationLevel at the client level and at the transaction level. supported methods are(RW and Blind Write): ``` - writeAtLeastOnce - runTransactionAsync - runTransaction - getTransaction - async getTransaction(from transaction runner class) ``` * refactor * refactor

alkatrivedi requested review from a team March 6, 2025 13:51

product-auto-label Bot added size: m Pull request size is medium. api: spanner Issues related to the googleapis/nodejs-spanner API. labels Mar 6, 2025

alkatrivedi force-pushed the isolation-level-option branch 2 times, most recently from 7b2f36b to 854c1ee Compare March 7, 2025 05:24

feat(spanner): add support for snapshot isolation

0913aec

alkatrivedi force-pushed the isolation-level-option branch from 854c1ee to 0913aec Compare March 7, 2025 05:28

feat(spanner): add support for snapshot isolation

d574252

alkatrivedi force-pushed the isolation-level-option branch from 0913aec to d574252 Compare March 7, 2025 05:30

gcf-owl-bot Bot and others added 3 commits March 7, 2025 05:33

🦉 Updates from OwlBot post-processor

e4d52df

See https://github.com/googleapis/repo-automation-bots/blob/main/packages/owl-bot/README.md

Merge branch 'isolation-level-option' of https://github.com/googleapi…

9312fcb

…s/nodejs-spanner into isolation-level-option

refactor get transaction

9ebd68b

alkatrivedi requested a review from surbhigarg92 March 7, 2025 06:22

alkatrivedi force-pushed the isolation-level-option branch 2 times, most recently from c73a9b9 to 1a2b964 Compare March 10, 2025 18:57

product-auto-label Bot added size: l Pull request size is large. and removed size: m Pull request size is medium. labels Mar 10, 2025

refactor

780461d

alkatrivedi force-pushed the isolation-level-option branch from 1a2b964 to 780461d Compare March 10, 2025 19:21

surbhigarg92 reviewed Mar 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

alkatrivedi force-pushed the isolation-level-option branch from 850b7ae to 780461d Compare March 12, 2025 12:53

Merge branch 'main' into isolation-level-option

38c4240

alkatrivedi force-pushed the isolation-level-option branch 2 times, most recently from 5ee608e to 68edb46 Compare March 13, 2025 10:27

refactor

8633c2c

alkatrivedi force-pushed the isolation-level-option branch from 68edb46 to 8633c2c Compare March 13, 2025 10:54

surbhigarg92 reviewed Mar 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'main' into isolation-level-option

30818c4

alkatrivedi force-pushed the isolation-level-option branch from 56cfbe1 to b628ba6 Compare March 19, 2025 08:36

alkatrivedi force-pushed the isolation-level-option branch 4 times, most recently from 8cd74dc to ae96078 Compare March 19, 2025 11:18

alkatrivedi added kokoro:force-run Add this label to force Kokoro to re-run the tests. owlbot:run Add this label to trigger the Owlbot post processor. labels Mar 19, 2025

gcf-owl-bot Bot removed the owlbot:run Add this label to trigger the Owlbot post processor. label Mar 19, 2025

yoshi-kokoro removed the kokoro:force-run Add this label to force Kokoro to re-run the tests. label Mar 19, 2025

alkatrivedi force-pushed the isolation-level-option branch from ae96078 to aaaf522 Compare March 19, 2025 11:25

surbhigarg92 approved these changes Mar 20, 2025

View reviewed changes

test: refactor

440f020

alkatrivedi force-pushed the isolation-level-option branch from aaaf522 to 440f020 Compare March 20, 2025 09:17

alkatrivedi added kokoro:force-run Add this label to force Kokoro to re-run the tests. automerge Merge the pull request once unit tests and other checks pass. labels Mar 20, 2025

yoshi-kokoro removed the kokoro:force-run Add this label to force Kokoro to re-run the tests. label Mar 20, 2025

gcf-merge-on-green Bot merged commit b60a683 into main Mar 20, 2025

gcf-merge-on-green Bot removed the automerge Merge the pull request once unit tests and other checks pass. label Mar 20, 2025

gcf-merge-on-green Bot deleted the isolation-level-option branch March 20, 2025 10:14

release-please Bot mentioned this pull request Mar 20, 2025

chore(main): release 7.20.0 #2253

Merged

alkatrivedi mentioned this pull request Apr 2, 2025

feat(spanner): add support for option isolationLevel #2250

Closed

	transaction!.setReadWriteTransactionOptions(options);
	transaction!.setReadWriteTransactionOptions(options as RunTransactionOptions);

Conversation

alkatrivedi commented Mar 6, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alkatrivedi Mar 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

alkatrivedi commented Mar 6, 2025 •

edited

Loading

alkatrivedi Mar 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading