-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
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
[BUG] Transactions are not removed in LiteDB 5.0.18 #2435
Comments
Hi, I also have a "Maximum number of transactions is reached." issue on my project with versions 5.0.18 & 5.0.19! Do I need to adapt my code in some way? Note: version 5.0.17 works fine for me too. |
This problem occurs even in the case of a single thread.
I will send a pull request to fix it. |
@mbdavid Assuming this fix has been tested and verified, can we get a new release that includes it? Note that we rolled this fix into 5.0.19 and found that it resolves the "Maximum number of transactions reached" error, and also the DiskWriterQueue locking issue #2307 which has been preventing us from upgrading to v5. |
Hi - what's the update on this? I see a PR linked as open. It would be good to get this issue fixed so we can update. |
I saw the same issue when upgrading from 5.0.12 to 5.0.19. Version 5.0.17 is the only workable solution for now it seems... |
Hi together, are there any updates on this? Also still staying with 5.0.17 due to this issue |
…ead lock when done reading
This issue has been addressed and fixed in the latest commit. |
Version
5.0.18
Describe the bug
We use a single IDatabase instance registered as singleton. Our application performs reads and writes from many different threads. After a little while, LiteDB starts throwing exceptions that the max number of transactions is reached. While inspecting TransactionMonitor, we only see an increasing number of transactions.
With 5.0.17 everything works fine and transactions are released properly.
Code to Reproduce
Expected behavior
The code above should run without exception.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: