Lockless means sometimes decryption fails? about lua-resty-session

[bungle]

Locking only happens per session, it has no impact on other sessions. Whenever you use session for writing, you should call session:start as late as possible and after that session:save as soon as possible. Right now if you open session for reading with session:open, and that will also do locking (if enabled). For that we need to add session:close (that we don't currently have). So then you could use patterns:

local s = session.start()
-- read and/or write
s:save() -- or perhaps s:destroy()

And

local s = session.open()
-- read-only
s:close()

I will add that soon. But for your use case, you cannot really make two parallel request without any locking, and because your another call may change the session, you need to update second one to send that updated session cookie (browsers do this automatically). In general you should minimize the places where you change session data, and often you should store bare minimum in session (such as user_id).

You can always use cookie storage (which is default). That is always lockless.

[bungle]

Closing this as closewas added long time ago.