#35349: Transaction API does not respect the DATABASE_ROUTERS configuration
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
     Reporter:  diachkow             |                    Owner:  nobody
         Type:  Bug                  |                   Status:  new
    Component:  Database layer       |                  Version:
  (models, ORM)                      |
     Severity:  Normal               |               Resolution:
     Keywords:  transaction, db,     |             Triage Stage:
  database routers                   |  Unreviewed
    Has patch:  0                    |      Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0                    |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0                    |                    UI/UX:  0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Description changed by diachkow:

Old description:

> Using the transaction API from `django.db.transaction` module directly
> does not respect the DATABASE_ROUTERS configuration and it does not grab
> the db_for_write() database alias by default. Instead, it always falls
> down to django.db.utils.DEFAULT_DB_ALIAS. The expected behaviour for this
> case would either use db_for_write() or introduce a new
> db_for_transaction() method for database routers as was proposed in
> [https://groups.google.com/g/django-developers/c/clzg6MiixFc this
> discussion]. The discussion itself has no resolution in a two years, so I
> have decided to create a dedicated issue for that.
>
> What I mean, if that whenever in code you use:
>
> {{{
> from django.db import trasnaction
>
> @transaction.atomic()
> def foo(...):
>      # ... do stuff ...
>      transaction.commit()
> }}}
>

> The `atomic()`, `commit()` and other functions should get the
> write/transaction database under the hood.
> ----
> ** Note **: I am developing an application that switches the database
> connection on per-tenant bases. The database configurations are added to
> settings.DATABASES at runtime in a middleware and then, using the
> `contextvars.ContextVar` thread-local variable, I am passing the database
> alias to use from a middleware to my custom database router. It works
> fine for reading and writing data outside the transactions, but it fails
> when it comes to transaction. I could potentially pass the value of
> `ContextVar` as an argument to all Transaction API calls, but it still
> fails for the third-party libraries that are mostly calling this
> functions without arguments. I have patched globally
> `django.db.transaction.DEFAULT_DB_ALIAS` to a stub string-like object
> that resolves dynamically in a runtime to a value of `ContextVar`, but
> that solution seems to be weird and I wish I could make it through
> configuring `DATABASE_ROUTERS`.

New description:

 Using the transaction API from `django.db.transaction` module directly
 does not respect the DATABASE_ROUTERS configuration and it does not grab
 the db_for_write() database alias by default. Instead, it always falls
 down to django.db.utils.DEFAULT_DB_ALIAS. The expected behaviour for this
 case would either use db_for_write() or introduce a new
 db_for_transaction() method for database routers as was proposed in
 [https://groups.google.com/g/django-developers/c/clzg6MiixFc this
 discussion]. The discussion itself has no resolution in a two years, so I
 have decided to create a dedicated issue for that.

 What I mean, if that whenever in code you use:

 {{{
 from django.db import trasnaction

 @transaction.atomic()
 def foo(...):
      # ... do stuff ...
      transaction.commit()
 }}}


 The `atomic()`, `commit()` and other functions should access the
 write/transaction database under the hood.
 ----
 ** Note **: I am developing an application that switches the database
 connection on per-tenant bases. The database configurations are added to
 settings.DATABASES at runtime in a middleware and then, using the
 `contextvars.ContextVar` thread-local variable, I am passing the database
 alias to use from a middleware to my custom database router. It works fine
 for reading and writing data outside the transactions, but it fails when
 it comes to transaction. I could potentially pass the value of
 `ContextVar` as an argument to all Transaction API calls, but it still
 fails for the third-party libraries that are mostly calling this functions
 without arguments. I have patched globally
 `django.db.transaction.DEFAULT_DB_ALIAS` to a stub string-like object that
 resolves dynamically in a runtime to a value of `ContextVar`, but that
 solution seems to be weird and I wish I could make it through configuring
 `DATABASE_ROUTERS`.

--
-- 
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/35349#comment:1>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018e9e84b1c9-b0514e74-02a0-4cb0-a70f-b17a586fabe3-000000%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Reply via email to