Hi Paul,
I think we're approaching this from opposing directions. It is *exactly*
the "downsides" of the file format that impose these constraints. The
problem is that QGIS isn't handling them well which is where we get
situations like this.
I 100% agree with you about it being unreasonable for users to know
about this, and QGIS definitely needs to handle it better, especially if
it's the default format. That's why I came in with the docs to explain
where the problem probably lies.
> 2. Ideally it would be possible for QGIS to prevent multiple edit
sessions
Multiple edit sessions are absolutely fine, on a *local* filesystem at
the SQLite file level. It may *not* be fine at the data level: if you
and I edit the same polygon at the same time and then commit, what
happens? Which does QGIS keep? That's an application-level problem for
QGIS (no idea if it's addressed). For the SQLite file itself, *only*
multiple editors via the network is a problem (well, at the other things
on that link). It's definitely something QGIS needs to be able to handle
better / warn about / lock.
I'd suggest raising this second issue on the QGIS tracker as a bug.
Cheers,
Jonathan
On 2019-10-07 15:37, Paul Wittle wrote:
Hi,
I think the issue is not really the downsides of the file format so much as the
more recent promotion of GeoPackage as a default format over shapefiles.
In my view it is unreasonable to expect the average user to delve into this
level of detail and I would personally expect that the software (or
documentation) would make clear any serious issues such as data corruption
risks. Personally I’d go further and say work to avoid the situation at all.
This is why I asked the question really as there seem to me to be two key
points:
1. There is some evidence that read-only access may be editing the file,
see https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/issues/23991
2. Ideally it would be possible for QGIS to prevent multiple edit sessions
IMHO the usefulness of the format seems limited if it is not possible for
multiple users to view the same data. That said, the bug report I’ve linked to
shows that other agree and the issue is being dealt with using the normal
methods.
The second point is really the focus of why I originally asked the question. It
is clear that SQLite itself cannot achieve this as it is unaware of edit
sessions however QGIS could simply create a sidecar file as a worst case and
that should work. If the sidecar file exists then editing is not possible
unless you own the file otherwise the file is available for editing.
In simple terms I want QGIS to say no (and explain it is already being edited
in a dialog) if a second user tries to put a GeoPackage in edit mode when
someone else is already editing it.
I’ve already created a section in my bespoke plugin which corrects the bad
projections for MapInfo tab files so I might just write the functionality above
myself using Python.
Cheers,
Paul
From: Jonathan Moules <jonathan-li...@lightpear.com>
Sent: 07 October 2019 15:17
To: Tobias Wendorff <tobias.wendo...@tu-dortmund.de>; Andrea Peri
<aperi2...@gmail.com>
Cc: qgis-user <qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org>; Paul Wittle
<p.wit...@dorsetcc.gov.uk>
Subject: Re: [Qgis-user] GeoPackage deadlocks (Andrea Peri)
(A little late).
TL;DR: at least for QGIS, is - never multi-user edit
SQLite/SpatiaLite/GeoPackages on network file systems.
SQLite, (and therefore SpatiaLite and GeoPackage) has quite a few caveats when
it comes to multiple users trying to edit it at once.
https://www2.sqlite.org/howtocorrupt.html
(my bold)
"SQLite depends on the underlying filesystem to do locking as the documentation says
it will. But some filesystems contain bugs in their locking logic such that the locks do
not always behave as advertised. This is especially true of network filesystems and NFS
in particular. If SQLite is used on a filesystem where the locking primitives contain
bugs, and if two or more threads or processes try to access the same database at the same
time, then database corruption might result."
And there's also:
https://www.sqlite.org/whentouse.html
Put simply (Note: I'm not an expert): It's fine to edit SQLite databases if
they're not on a network file system with as many users as you want, or if they
are on a network and you can guarantee only one process is going to write.
However if multiple people/processes want to write to a network file system,
you'll need a piece of middleware to manage the process, otherwise there's a
good chance of corruption as Paul is seeing.
It may also be that QGIS is doing some of the other things on the "how to
corrupt" page too. I imagine it will only get worse if you use multiple different
software packages to edit simultaneously.
Cheers,
Jonathan
On 2019-09-27 09:50, Tobias Wendorff wrote:
Am 27.09.2019 um 10:24 schrieb Andrea Peri
<aperi2...@gmail.com><mailto:aperi2...@gmail.com>:
Have you tried to use spatialite instead of geopackage. ?
Why not plain SQLite? Nobody needs and uses the spatial functions of
Spatialite, they are even not part of bloatware GPKG (sorry, the created
db-files are huge without any compression).
The only reason is indexing and this could be forked off GPGK and Spatialite.
To the topic: I think, it‘s always a bad idea to let multiple users work on a
single SQLite-based database. It hasn‘t been created for this reason.
_______________________________________________
Qgis-user mailing list
Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org>
List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use
of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. It may contain
unclassified but sensitive or protectively marked material and should be
handled accordingly. Unless you are the named addressee (or authorised to
receive it for the addressee) you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to
anyone else. If you have received this transmission in error please notify the
sender immediately. All traffic may be subject to recording and/or monitoring
in accordance with relevant legislation. Any views expressed in this message
are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifies and with
authority, states them to be the views of Dorset Council. Dorset Council does
not accept service of documents by fax or other electronic means. Virus
checking: Whilst all reasonable steps have been taken to ensure that this
electronic communication and its attachments whether encoded, encrypted or
otherwise supplied are free from computer viruses, Dorset Council accepts no
liability in respect of any loss, cost, damage or expense suffered as a result
of accessing this message or any of its attachments. For information on how
Dorset Council processes your information, please see
www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/416433
_______________________________________________
Qgis-user mailing list
Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org
List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
