Web Dev Cody•14mo ago

what does this error mean

my understanding is that mutations are transactions that also include built in conflict resolutions. I'm not sure what this means?

22 Replies

Web Dev CodyOP•14mo ago

this is what my mutation is doing

export const setPlanSectionStatus = internalMutation({
  args: {
    planId: v.id('plans'),
    key: v.string(),
    status: v.union(v.literal('generating'), v.literal('complete')),
  },
  handler: async (ctx, args) => {
    const plan = await ctx.db.get(args.planId);

    await ctx.db.patch(args.planId, {
      plan: {
        ...plan?.plan,
        [args.key]: {
          ...plan?.plan[args.key],
          status: args.status,
        },
      },
    });
  },
});

export const setPlanSectionStatus = internalMutation({
  args: {
    planId: v.id('plans'),
    key: v.string(),
    status: v.union(v.literal('generating'), v.literal('complete')),
  },
  handler: async (ctx, args) => {
    const plan = await ctx.db.get(args.planId);

    await ctx.db.patch(args.planId, {
      plan: {
        ...plan?.plan,
        [args.key]: {
          ...plan?.plan[args.key],
          status: args.status,
        },
      },
    });
  },
});

I have maybe 10 other tasks that might run this same mutation at the same time

Web Dev CodyOP•14mo ago

is this related to me having a .any() field where I store a giant json object?

Web Dev CodyOP•14mo ago

I guess I can also ask about this one

Web Dev CodyOP•14mo ago

convex ai helper says network glitches can cause this, but is this something rare?

ballingt•14mo ago

my understanding is that mutations are transactions that also include built in conflict resolutions. I'm not sure what this means?

that's right, the built-in conflict resolution works by rolling back the effects of a mutation if it steps on another mutation's toes and carefully rerunning the mutation. There's a limit on retries though: if these keep failing the system returns a failure like this.

is this related to me having a .any() field where I store a giant json object?

That can increase the length of time the mutation takes and therefore that the transaction is open for so this could be related.

I have maybe 10 other tasks that might run this same mutation at the same time

Are these mutations reading and writing the same planId? If not this is really unexpected.

Web Dev CodyOP•14mo ago

yeah I mean the mutation just does those 2 lines fetches the plan patches the plan.plan property

ballingt•14mo ago

One way to hve less contention would be to split out keys to be records in a different table so that modifying one key doesn't interfere with modifying another key

Web Dev CodyOP•14mo ago

I have 1 action which uses the scheduler to run 11 actions, each of those actions runs a query to fetch the plan info, updates the plan to "generating" status, then it uses openai to generate some data, then it writes back to the plan the generated data yeah I may look into doing that

ballingt•14mo ago

roughly

defineTable("planKeys", {
  planId: v.id('plan'),
  key: v.string(),
  value: v.any(),
});

defineTable("planKeys", {
  planId: v.id('plan'),
  key: v.string(),
  value: v.any(),
});

Web Dev CodyOP•14mo ago

was prototyping as well and i got htis

plans: defineTable({
    userId: v.string(),
    idea: v.string(),
    targetUser: v.string(),
    plan: v.any(),
    version: v.number(),
  }).index('by_userId', ['userId']),
  section: defineTable({
    userId: v.string(),
    planId: v.string(),
    type: v.union(v.literal('summary'), v.literal('icons')),
    status: v.union(v.literal('generating'), v.literal('completed')),
  }).index('by_planId_type', ['planId', 'type']),

plans: defineTable({
    userId: v.string(),
    idea: v.string(),
    targetUser: v.string(),
    plan: v.any(),
    version: v.number(),
  }).index('by_userId', ['userId']),
  section: defineTable({
    userId: v.string(),
    planId: v.string(),
    type: v.union(v.literal('summary'), v.literal('icons')),
    status: v.union(v.literal('generating'), v.literal('completed')),
  }).index('by_planId_type', ['planId', 'type']),

ballingt•14mo ago

We're thinking about how to help people debug these situations, this error message text changed fairly recently I think, trying to describe the read/write conflicts

Web Dev CodyOP•14mo ago

oh I forgot value

ballingt•14mo ago

cool yeah

Web Dev CodyOP•14mo ago

does the composite index make sense in this situtation do you think?

ballingt•14mo ago

yeah, it lets you get a specific type or all types for a planId which is a common query since you need that to construct the plan

Web Dev CodyOP•14mo ago

how do I re-use the same v.union I defined in the schema?

Web Dev CodyOP•14mo ago

like can I just define like this at the top of the schema, then import in my action for defining my args?

Michal Srb•14mo ago

Yep, you got it right!

ian•14mo ago

We just put out an article or two on managing the types: https://stack.convex.dev/argument-validation-without-repetition and https://stack.convex.dev/types-cookbook

Argument Validation without Repetition

In the first post in this series, the Types and Validators cookbook, we shared several basic patterns & bes...

Types and Validators in TypeScript: A Convex Cookbook

It can be tough to wrangle types to behave how you want them to. Thankfully, Convex was designed to make the experience with types perfect. Learn why ...

what does this error mean

Did you find this page helpful?