IndexedDB: Ensure transactions without requests commit in the same order

IndexedDB: Ensure transactions without requests commit in the same order

In the IDB back-end, a Commit() request that came through for a
transaction that never had any requests was allowed to run the commit
steps without having seen a Start() call from the transaction
coordinator. While the operations would never run out of order, the
commit would happens unexpectedly early from the point of view of
script - i.e. before an earlier transaction with overlapping scope has
completed.

Handle this special case, using the existing commit_pending_ flag
and a new test in Start().

R=palakj@chromium.org,cmumford@chromium.org
BUG=614530
Committed: https://crrev.com/d546a9d9162ce273c8b789306ae934b5db9ed6d1
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#401395}

[jsbell, 2016-06-21 23:40:59]

palakj@ - can you do an initial review of this patch?

[cmumford, 2016-06-22 16:53:38]

lgtm % nits

https://codereview.chromium.org/2083203002/diff/1/content/browser/indexed_db/...
File content/browser/indexed_db/indexed_db_transaction.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2083203002/diff/1/content/browser/indexed_db/...
content/browser/indexed_db/indexed_db_transaction.cc:202: void
CommitUnused(scoped_refptr<IndexedDBTransaction> transaction) {
Do you want an anonymous namespace inside of the "content" namespace? Top of
file? I'm not sure what is correct here.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2083203002/diff/1/content/browser/indexed_db/...
content/browser/indexed_db/indexed_db_transaction.cc:217: // but the front-end
requested a commit initiate the commit
Nit: oddly worded "commit initiate the commit".

https://codereview.chromium.org/2083203002/diff/1/content/browser/indexed_db/...
content/browser/indexed_db/indexed_db_transaction.cc:271: if (state_ != STARTED)
Nit: Possibly worthy of a short comment - your call.

[palakj1, 2016-06-22 18:32:53]

On 2016/06/21 at 23:40:59, jsbell wrote:
> palakj@ - can you do an initial review of this patch?

looks good to me

[jsbell, 2016-06-22 18:53:05]

Thanks!

(Note that this test landed upstream; we can delete this copy when wpt rolls.)

https://codereview.chromium.org/2083203002/diff/1/content/browser/indexed_db/...
File content/browser/indexed_db/indexed_db_transaction.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2083203002/diff/1/content/browser/indexed_db/...
content/browser/indexed_db/indexed_db_transaction.cc:202: void
CommitUnused(scoped_refptr<IndexedDBTransaction> transaction) {
On 2016/06/22 16:53:37, cmumford wrote:
> Do you want an anonymous namespace inside of the "content" namespace? Top of
> file? I'm not sure what is correct here.

Yeah, we mostly put anon/helpers at the top, so moved. And added a comment.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2083203002/diff/1/content/browser/indexed_db/...
content/browser/indexed_db/indexed_db_transaction.cc:217: // but the front-end
requested a commit initiate the commit
On 2016/06/22 16:53:37, cmumford wrote:
> Nit: oddly worded "commit initiate the commit".

Fixed, thx.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2083203002/diff/1/content/browser/indexed_db/...
content/browser/indexed_db/indexed_db_transaction.cc:271: if (state_ != STARTED)
On 2016/06/22 16:53:37, cmumford wrote:
> Nit: Possibly worthy of a short comment - your call.

Done.

[jsbell, 2016-06-22 18:53:09]

The CQ bit was checked by jsbell@chromium.org

[jsbell, 2016-06-22 18:53:09]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
cmumford@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2083203002/#ps20001
(title: "Review feedback")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-06-22 18:53:28]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/2083203002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-06-22 20:54:43]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-06-22 20:55:54]

Description was changed from

==========
IndexedDB: Ensure transactions without requests commit in the same order

In the IDB back-end, a Commit() request that came through for a
transaction that never had any requests was allowed to run the commit
steps without having seen a Start() call from the transaction
coordinator. While the operations would never run out of order, the
commit would happens unexpectedly early from the point of view of
script - i.e. before an earlier transaction with overlapping scope has
completed.

Handle this special case, using the existing commit_pending_ flag
and a new test in Start().

R=palakj@chromium.org,cmumford@chromium.org
BUG=614530
==========

to

==========
IndexedDB: Ensure transactions without requests commit in the same order

In the IDB back-end, a Commit() request that came through for a
transaction that never had any requests was allowed to run the commit
steps without having seen a Start() call from the transaction
coordinator. While the operations would never run out of order, the
commit would happens unexpectedly early from the point of view of
script - i.e. before an earlier transaction with overlapping scope has
completed.

Handle this special case, using the existing commit_pending_ flag
and a new test in Start().

R=palakj@chromium.org,cmumford@chromium.org
BUG=614530

Committed: https://crrev.com/d546a9d9162ce273c8b789306ae934b5db9ed6d1
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#401395}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-06-22 20:55:55]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/d546a9d9162ce273c8b789306ae934b5db9ed6d1
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#401395}