This introduces `djblets.protect`, a new module for service protection capabilities, and specifically `djblets.protect.locks.CacheLock`, which is a simple distributed lock utilizing the cache backend. This can help avoid cache stampede issues, and overall reduce the work required by a service. It's important to note that these locks should only be used in cases where the loss of a lock will not cause corruption or other bad behavior. As cache backends may expire keys prematurely, and may lack atomic operations, a lock cannot be guaranteed. These can be thought of as a soft optimistic lock. Locks have an expiration, and consumers can block waiting on a lock to be available or return immediately, giving control over how to best utilize a lock. Locks are set by performing an atomic `add()` with a UUID4. If the value is added, the lock is acquired. If it already exists, the lock has to either block waiting or return a result. Waiting supports a timeout and a time between retries. When waiting, the lock will periodically check if it can acquire a new lock, using the provided timestamp and some random jitter to help avoid issues with stampedes where too many consumers are trying at the same times to check and acquire a lock. Locks are released when they expire or (ideally) when `release()` is called. It's also possible they may fall out of cache, at which point the lock is no longer valid, and suitable logging will occur. Since there aren't atomic operations around deletes, this will try to do release a lock as safely as possible. If the time spent with the lock is greater than the expected expiration, it will assume the lock has expired in cache and won't delete it (it may have been re-acquired elsewhere). Otherwise, it will attempt to bump the expiration to keep the key alive long enough to check it, with a worst-case scenario that the other acquirer may have a new expiration set (likely extending the lock). This is preferable over deleting another lock. When using a lock as a context manager, both acquiring and releasing the lock is handled automatically. The interface is designed to be largely API-compatible with `threading.Lock` and similar lock interfaces, but with more flexibility useful for distributed lock behavior. A pattern I expect to be common will be to lock a cache key when calculating state to store and then writing it, which may be expensive (for instance, talking to a remote service and storing the result). For this, `cache_memoize()` and `cache_memoize_iter()` have been updated to work with locks. They now take a `lock=` argument, which accepts a `CacheLock` with the parameters controlling the lock behavior. If provided, the lock will be acquired if the initial fetch doesn't yield a value. A second fetch is then attempted (in case it had to wait for another process to finish), and if it still needs to compute data to cache, it will do so under the protection of the lock, releasing when complete. Locks are entirely optional and not enabled by default for any current caching behavior, but are something we'll likely want to opt into any time we're working on caching something that's expensive to generate.