You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.

4602 lines
136 KiB

Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.23.18 committer: Davi Arnaut <Davi.Arnaut@Sun.COM> branch nick: 4284-6.0 timestamp: Mon 2009-03-02 18:18:26 -0300 message: Bug#989: If DROP TABLE while there's an active transaction, wrong binlog order WL#4284: Transactional DDL locking This is a prerequisite patch: These changes are intended to split lock requests from granted locks and to allow the memory and lifetime of granted locks to be managed within the MDL subsystem. Furthermore, tickets can now be shared and therefore are used to satisfy multiple lock requests, but only shared locks can be recursive. The problem is that the MDL subsystem morphs lock requests into granted locks locks but does not manage the memory and lifetime of lock requests, and hence, does not manage the memory of granted locks either. This can be problematic because it puts the burden of tracking references on the users of the subsystem and it can't be easily done in transactional contexts where the locks have to be kept around for the duration of a transaction. Another issue is that recursive locks (when the context trying to acquire a lock already holds a lock on the same object) requires that each time the lock is granted, a unique lock request/granted lock structure structure must be kept around until the lock is released. This can lead to memory leaks in transactional contexts as locks taken during the transaction should only be released at the end of the transaction. This also leads to unnecessary wake ups (broadcasts) in the MDL subsystem if the context still holds a equivalent of the lock being released. These issues are exacerbated due to the fact that WL#4284 low-level design says that the implementation should "2) Store metadata locks in transaction memory root, rather than statement memory root" but this is not possible because a memory root, as implemented in mysys, requires all objects allocated from it to be freed all at once. This patch combines review input and significant code contributions from Konstantin Osipov (kostja) and Dmitri Lenev (dlenev).
16 years ago
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.23.18 committer: Davi Arnaut <Davi.Arnaut@Sun.COM> branch nick: 4284-6.0 timestamp: Mon 2009-03-02 18:18:26 -0300 message: Bug#989: If DROP TABLE while there's an active transaction, wrong binlog order WL#4284: Transactional DDL locking This is a prerequisite patch: These changes are intended to split lock requests from granted locks and to allow the memory and lifetime of granted locks to be managed within the MDL subsystem. Furthermore, tickets can now be shared and therefore are used to satisfy multiple lock requests, but only shared locks can be recursive. The problem is that the MDL subsystem morphs lock requests into granted locks locks but does not manage the memory and lifetime of lock requests, and hence, does not manage the memory of granted locks either. This can be problematic because it puts the burden of tracking references on the users of the subsystem and it can't be easily done in transactional contexts where the locks have to be kept around for the duration of a transaction. Another issue is that recursive locks (when the context trying to acquire a lock already holds a lock on the same object) requires that each time the lock is granted, a unique lock request/granted lock structure structure must be kept around until the lock is released. This can lead to memory leaks in transactional contexts as locks taken during the transaction should only be released at the end of the transaction. This also leads to unnecessary wake ups (broadcasts) in the MDL subsystem if the context still holds a equivalent of the lock being released. These issues are exacerbated due to the fact that WL#4284 low-level design says that the implementation should "2) Store metadata locks in transaction memory root, rather than statement memory root" but this is not possible because a memory root, as implemented in mysys, requires all objects allocated from it to be freed all at once. This patch combines review input and significant code contributions from Konstantin Osipov (kostja) and Dmitri Lenev (dlenev).
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.23.18 committer: Davi Arnaut <Davi.Arnaut@Sun.COM> branch nick: 4284-6.0 timestamp: Mon 2009-03-02 18:18:26 -0300 message: Bug#989: If DROP TABLE while there's an active transaction, wrong binlog order WL#4284: Transactional DDL locking This is a prerequisite patch: These changes are intended to split lock requests from granted locks and to allow the memory and lifetime of granted locks to be managed within the MDL subsystem. Furthermore, tickets can now be shared and therefore are used to satisfy multiple lock requests, but only shared locks can be recursive. The problem is that the MDL subsystem morphs lock requests into granted locks locks but does not manage the memory and lifetime of lock requests, and hence, does not manage the memory of granted locks either. This can be problematic because it puts the burden of tracking references on the users of the subsystem and it can't be easily done in transactional contexts where the locks have to be kept around for the duration of a transaction. Another issue is that recursive locks (when the context trying to acquire a lock already holds a lock on the same object) requires that each time the lock is granted, a unique lock request/granted lock structure structure must be kept around until the lock is released. This can lead to memory leaks in transactional contexts as locks taken during the transaction should only be released at the end of the transaction. This also leads to unnecessary wake ups (broadcasts) in the MDL subsystem if the context still holds a equivalent of the lock being released. These issues are exacerbated due to the fact that WL#4284 low-level design says that the implementation should "2) Store metadata locks in transaction memory root, rather than statement memory root" but this is not possible because a memory root, as implemented in mysys, requires all objects allocated from it to be freed all at once. This patch combines review input and significant code contributions from Konstantin Osipov (kostja) and Dmitri Lenev (dlenev).
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Patch that changes approach to how we acquire metadata locks for DML statements and changes the way MDL locks are acquired/granted in contended case. Instead of backing-off when a lock conflict is encountered and waiting for it to go away before restarting open_tables() process we now wait for lock to be released without releasing any previously acquired locks. If conflicting lock goes away we resume opening tables. If waiting leads to a deadlock we try to resolve it by backing-off and restarting open_tables() immediately. As result both waiting for possibility to acquire and acquiring of a metadata lock now always happen within the same MDL API call. This has allowed to make release of a lock and granting it to the most appropriate pending request an atomic operation. Thanks to this it became possible to wake up during release of lock only those waiters which requests can be satisfied at the moment as well as wake up only one waiter in case when granting its request would prevent all other requests from being satisfied. This solves thundering herd problem which occured in cases when we were releasing some lock and woke up many waiters for SNRW or X locks (this was the issue in bug#52289 "performance regression for MyISAM in sysbench OLTP_RW test". This also allowed to implement more fair (FIFO) scheduling among waiters with the same priority. It also opens the door for introducing new types of requests for metadata locks such as low-prio SNRW lock which is necessary in order to support LOCK TABLES LOW_PRIORITY WRITE. Notice that after this sometimes can report ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error in cases in which it has not happened before. Particularly we will always report this error if waiting for conflicting lock has happened in the middle of transaction and resulted in a deadlock. Before this patch the error was not reported if deadlock could have been resolved by backing off all metadata locks acquired by the current statement.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Patch that changes approach to how we acquire metadata locks for DML statements and changes the way MDL locks are acquired/granted in contended case. Instead of backing-off when a lock conflict is encountered and waiting for it to go away before restarting open_tables() process we now wait for lock to be released without releasing any previously acquired locks. If conflicting lock goes away we resume opening tables. If waiting leads to a deadlock we try to resolve it by backing-off and restarting open_tables() immediately. As result both waiting for possibility to acquire and acquiring of a metadata lock now always happen within the same MDL API call. This has allowed to make release of a lock and granting it to the most appropriate pending request an atomic operation. Thanks to this it became possible to wake up during release of lock only those waiters which requests can be satisfied at the moment as well as wake up only one waiter in case when granting its request would prevent all other requests from being satisfied. This solves thundering herd problem which occured in cases when we were releasing some lock and woke up many waiters for SNRW or X locks (this was the issue in bug#52289 "performance regression for MyISAM in sysbench OLTP_RW test". This also allowed to implement more fair (FIFO) scheduling among waiters with the same priority. It also opens the door for introducing new types of requests for metadata locks such as low-prio SNRW lock which is necessary in order to support LOCK TABLES LOW_PRIORITY WRITE. Notice that after this sometimes can report ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error in cases in which it has not happened before. Particularly we will always report this error if waiting for conflicting lock has happened in the middle of transaction and resulted in a deadlock. Before this patch the error was not reported if deadlock could have been resolved by backing off all metadata locks acquired by the current statement.
16 years ago
Patch that changes approach to how we acquire metadata locks for DML statements and changes the way MDL locks are acquired/granted in contended case. Instead of backing-off when a lock conflict is encountered and waiting for it to go away before restarting open_tables() process we now wait for lock to be released without releasing any previously acquired locks. If conflicting lock goes away we resume opening tables. If waiting leads to a deadlock we try to resolve it by backing-off and restarting open_tables() immediately. As result both waiting for possibility to acquire and acquiring of a metadata lock now always happen within the same MDL API call. This has allowed to make release of a lock and granting it to the most appropriate pending request an atomic operation. Thanks to this it became possible to wake up during release of lock only those waiters which requests can be satisfied at the moment as well as wake up only one waiter in case when granting its request would prevent all other requests from being satisfied. This solves thundering herd problem which occured in cases when we were releasing some lock and woke up many waiters for SNRW or X locks (this was the issue in bug#52289 "performance regression for MyISAM in sysbench OLTP_RW test". This also allowed to implement more fair (FIFO) scheduling among waiters with the same priority. It also opens the door for introducing new types of requests for metadata locks such as low-prio SNRW lock which is necessary in order to support LOCK TABLES LOW_PRIORITY WRITE. Notice that after this sometimes can report ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error in cases in which it has not happened before. Particularly we will always report this error if waiting for conflicting lock has happened in the middle of transaction and resulted in a deadlock. Before this patch the error was not reported if deadlock could have been resolved by backing off all metadata locks acquired by the current statement.
16 years ago
Patch that changes approach to how we acquire metadata locks for DML statements and changes the way MDL locks are acquired/granted in contended case. Instead of backing-off when a lock conflict is encountered and waiting for it to go away before restarting open_tables() process we now wait for lock to be released without releasing any previously acquired locks. If conflicting lock goes away we resume opening tables. If waiting leads to a deadlock we try to resolve it by backing-off and restarting open_tables() immediately. As result both waiting for possibility to acquire and acquiring of a metadata lock now always happen within the same MDL API call. This has allowed to make release of a lock and granting it to the most appropriate pending request an atomic operation. Thanks to this it became possible to wake up during release of lock only those waiters which requests can be satisfied at the moment as well as wake up only one waiter in case when granting its request would prevent all other requests from being satisfied. This solves thundering herd problem which occured in cases when we were releasing some lock and woke up many waiters for SNRW or X locks (this was the issue in bug#52289 "performance regression for MyISAM in sysbench OLTP_RW test". This also allowed to implement more fair (FIFO) scheduling among waiters with the same priority. It also opens the door for introducing new types of requests for metadata locks such as low-prio SNRW lock which is necessary in order to support LOCK TABLES LOW_PRIORITY WRITE. Notice that after this sometimes can report ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error in cases in which it has not happened before. Particularly we will always report this error if waiting for conflicting lock has happened in the middle of transaction and resulted in a deadlock. Before this patch the error was not reported if deadlock could have been resolved by backing off all metadata locks acquired by the current statement.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Patch that changes approach to how we acquire metadata locks for DML statements and changes the way MDL locks are acquired/granted in contended case. Instead of backing-off when a lock conflict is encountered and waiting for it to go away before restarting open_tables() process we now wait for lock to be released without releasing any previously acquired locks. If conflicting lock goes away we resume opening tables. If waiting leads to a deadlock we try to resolve it by backing-off and restarting open_tables() immediately. As result both waiting for possibility to acquire and acquiring of a metadata lock now always happen within the same MDL API call. This has allowed to make release of a lock and granting it to the most appropriate pending request an atomic operation. Thanks to this it became possible to wake up during release of lock only those waiters which requests can be satisfied at the moment as well as wake up only one waiter in case when granting its request would prevent all other requests from being satisfied. This solves thundering herd problem which occured in cases when we were releasing some lock and woke up many waiters for SNRW or X locks (this was the issue in bug#52289 "performance regression for MyISAM in sysbench OLTP_RW test". This also allowed to implement more fair (FIFO) scheduling among waiters with the same priority. It also opens the door for introducing new types of requests for metadata locks such as low-prio SNRW lock which is necessary in order to support LOCK TABLES LOW_PRIORITY WRITE. Notice that after this sometimes can report ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error in cases in which it has not happened before. Particularly we will always report this error if waiting for conflicting lock has happened in the middle of transaction and resulted in a deadlock. Before this patch the error was not reported if deadlock could have been resolved by backing off all metadata locks acquired by the current statement.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Fix for bug #52044 "FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK are incompatible". The problem was that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK which was issued when other connection has acquired global read lock using FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK was blocked and has to wait until global read lock is released. This issue stemmed from the fact that FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK implementation has acquired X metadata locks on tables to be flushed. Since these locks required acquiring of global IX lock this statement was incompatible with global read lock. This patch addresses problem by using SNW metadata type of lock for tables to be flushed by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK. It is OK to acquire them without global IX lock as long as we won't try to upgrade those locks. Since SNW locks allow concurrent statements using same table FLUSH TABLE <list> WITH READ LOCK now has to wait until old versions of tables to be flushed go away after acquiring metadata locks. Since such waiting can lead to deadlock MDL deadlock detector was extended to take into account waits for flush and resolve such deadlocks. As a bonus code in open_tables() which was responsible for waiting old versions of tables to go away was refactored. Now when we encounter old version of table in open_table() we don't back-off and wait for all old version to go away, but instead wait for this particular table to be flushed. Such approach supported by deadlock detection should reduce number of scenarios in which FLUSH TABLES aborts concurrent multi-statement transactions. Note that active FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK still blocks concurrent FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement as the former keeps tables open and thus prevents the latter statement from doing flush.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.7 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46044 timestamp: Thu 2009-08-27 10:22:17 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY FOR UPDATE". Deadlock occured when during execution of query to I_S we tried to open a table or its .FRM in order to get information about it and had to wait because we have encountered exclusive metadata lock on this table held by a DDL operation from another connection which in its turn waited for some resource currently owned by connection executing this I_S query. For example, this might have happened if one under LOCK TABLES executed I_S query targeted to particular table (which was not among locked) and also concurrently tried to create this table using CREATE TABLE SELECT which had to wait for one of tables locked by the first connection. Another situation in which deadlock might have occured is when I_S query, which was executed as part of transaction, tried to get information about table which just has been dropped by concurrent DROP TABLES executed under LOCK TABLES and this DROP TABLES for its completion also had to wait transaction from the first connection. This problem stemmed from the fact that opening of tables/.FRMs for I_S filling is happening outside of connection's main MDL_context so code which tries to detect deadlocks due to conflicting metadata locks doesn't work in this case. Indeed, this led to deadlocks when during I_S filling we tried to wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away, while its owner was waiting for some resource held by connection executing I_S query. This patch solves this problem by avoiding waiting in such situation. Instead we skip this table and produce warning that information about it was omitted from I_S due to concurrent DDL operation. We still wait for conflicting metadata lock to go away when it is known that deadlock is not possible (i.e. when connection executing I_S query does not hold any metadata or table-level locks). Basically, we apply our standard deadlock avoidance technique for metadata locks to the process of filling of I_S tables but replace ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error with a warning. Note that this change is supposed to be safe for 'mysqldump' since the only its mode which is affected by this change is --single-transaction mode is not safe in the presence of concurrent DDL anyway (and this fact is documented). Other modes are unaffected because they either use SHOW TABLES/SELECT * FROM I_S.TABLE_NAMES which do not take any metadata locks in the process of I_S table filling and thus cannot skip tables or execute I_S queries for tables which were previously locked by LOCK TABLES (or in the presence of global read lock) which excludes possibility of encountering conflicting metadata lock.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.10 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46673 timestamp: Tue 2009-09-01 19:57:05 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46673 "Deadlock between FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and DML". Deadlocks occured when one concurrently executed transactions with several statements modifying data and FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement or SET READ_ONLY=1 statement. These deadlocks were introduced by the patch for WL 4284: "Transactional DDL locking"/Bug 989: "If DROP TABLE while there's an active transaction, wrong binlog order" which has changed FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK/SET READ_ONLY=1 to wait for pending transactions. What happened was that FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK blocked all further statements changing tables by setting global_read_lock global variable and has started waiting for all pending transactions to complete. Then one of those transactions tried to executed DML, detected that global_read_lock non-zero and tried to wait until global read lock will be released (i.e. global_read_lock becomes 0), indeed, this led to a deadlock. Proper solution for this problem should probably involve full integration of global read lock with metadata locking subsystem (which will allow to implement waiting for pending transactions without blocking DML in them). But since it requires significant changes another, short-term solution for the problem is implemented in this patch. Basically, this patch restores behavior of FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK/ SET READ_ONLY=1 before the patch for WL 4284/bug 989. By ensuring that extra references to TABLE_SHARE are not stored for active metadata locks it changes these statements not to wait for pending transactions. As result deadlock is eliminated. Note that this does not change the fact that active FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK lock or SET READ_ONLY=1 prevent modifications to tables as they also block transaction commits.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Patch that changes approach to how we acquire metadata locks for DML statements and changes the way MDL locks are acquired/granted in contended case. Instead of backing-off when a lock conflict is encountered and waiting for it to go away before restarting open_tables() process we now wait for lock to be released without releasing any previously acquired locks. If conflicting lock goes away we resume opening tables. If waiting leads to a deadlock we try to resolve it by backing-off and restarting open_tables() immediately. As result both waiting for possibility to acquire and acquiring of a metadata lock now always happen within the same MDL API call. This has allowed to make release of a lock and granting it to the most appropriate pending request an atomic operation. Thanks to this it became possible to wake up during release of lock only those waiters which requests can be satisfied at the moment as well as wake up only one waiter in case when granting its request would prevent all other requests from being satisfied. This solves thundering herd problem which occured in cases when we were releasing some lock and woke up many waiters for SNRW or X locks (this was the issue in bug#52289 "performance regression for MyISAM in sysbench OLTP_RW test". This also allowed to implement more fair (FIFO) scheduling among waiters with the same priority. It also opens the door for introducing new types of requests for metadata locks such as low-prio SNRW lock which is necessary in order to support LOCK TABLES LOW_PRIORITY WRITE. Notice that after this sometimes can report ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error in cases in which it has not happened before. Particularly we will always report this error if waiting for conflicting lock has happened in the middle of transaction and resulted in a deadlock. Before this patch the error was not reported if deadlock could have been resolved by backing off all metadata locks acquired by the current statement.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implement new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks. Add a wait-for graph based deadlock detector to the MDL subsystem. Fixes bug #46272 "MySQL 5.4.4, new MDL: unnecessary deadlock" and bug #37346 "innodb does not detect deadlock between update and alter table". The first bug manifested itself as an unwarranted abort of a transaction with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error by a concurrent ALTER statement, when this transaction tried to repeat use of a table, which it has already used in a similar fashion before ALTER started. The second bug showed up as a deadlock between table-level locks and InnoDB row locks, which was "detected" only after innodb_lock_wait_timeout timeout. A transaction would start using the table and modify a few rows. Then ALTER TABLE would come in, and start copying rows into a temporary table. Eventually it would stumble on the modified records and get blocked on a row lock. The first transaction would try to do more updates, and get blocked on thr_lock.c lock. This situation of circular wait would only get resolved by a timeout. Both these bugs stemmed from inadequate solutions to the problem of deadlocks occurring between different locking subsystems. In the first case we tried to avoid deadlocks between metadata locking and table-level locking subsystems, when upgrading shared metadata lock to exclusive one. Transactions holding the shared lock on the table and waiting for some table-level lock used to be aborted too aggressively. We also allowed ALTER TABLE to start in presence of transactions that modify the subject table. ALTER TABLE acquires TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock at start, and that block all writes against the table (naturally, we don't want any writes to be lost when switching the old and the new table). TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock, in turn, would block the started transaction on thr_lock.c lock, should they do more updates. This, again, lead to the need to abort such transactions. The second bug occurred simply because we didn't have any mechanism to detect deadlocks between the table-level locks in thr_lock.c and row-level locks in InnoDB, other than innodb_lock_wait_timeout. This patch solves both these problems by moving lock conflicts which are causing these deadlocks into the metadata locking subsystem, thus making it possible to avoid or detect such deadlocks inside MDL. To do this we introduce new type-of-operation-aware metadata locks, which allow MDL subsystem to know not only the fact that transaction has used or is going to use some object but also what kind of operation it has carried out or going to carry out on the object. This, along with the addition of a special kind of upgradable metadata lock, allows ALTER TABLE to wait until all transactions which has updated the table to go away. This solves the second issue. Another special type of upgradable metadata lock is acquired by LOCK TABLE WRITE. This second lock type allows to solve the first issue, since abortion of table-level locks in event of DDL under LOCK TABLES becomes also unnecessary. Below follows the list of incompatible changes introduced by this patch: - From now on, ALTER TABLE and CREATE/DROP TRIGGER SQL (i.e. those statements that acquire TL_WRITE_ALLOW_READ lock) wait for all transactions which has *updated* the table to complete. - From now on, LOCK TABLES ... WRITE, REPAIR/OPTIMIZE TABLE (i.e. all statements which acquire TL_WRITE table-level lock) wait for all transaction which *updated or read* from the table to complete. As a consequence, innodb_table_locks=0 option no longer applies to LOCK TABLES ... WRITE. - DROP DATABASE, DROP TABLE, RENAME TABLE no longer abort statements or transactions which use tables being dropped or renamed, and instead wait for these transactions to complete. - Since LOCK TABLES WRITE now takes a special metadata lock, not compatible with with reads or writes against the subject table and transaction-wide, thr_lock.c deadlock avoidance algorithm that used to ensure absence of deadlocks between LOCK TABLES WRITE and other statements is no longer sufficient, even for MyISAM. The wait-for graph based deadlock detector of MDL subsystem may sometimes be necessary and is involved. This may lead to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error produced for multi-statement transactions even if these only use MyISAM: session 1: session 2: begin; update t1 ... lock table t2 write, t1 write; -- gets a lock on t2, blocks on t1 update t2 ... (ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK) - Finally, support of LOW_PRIORITY option for LOCK TABLES ... WRITE was abandoned. LOCK TABLE ... LOW_PRIORITY WRITE from now on has the same priority as the usual LOCK TABLE ... WRITE. SELECT HIGH PRIORITY no longer trumps LOCK TABLE ... WRITE in the wait queue. - We do not take upgradable metadata locks on implicitly locked tables. So if one has, say, a view v1 that uses table t1, and issues: LOCK TABLE v1 WRITE; FLUSH TABLE t1; -- (or just 'FLUSH TABLES'), an error is produced. In order to be able to perform DDL on a table under LOCK TABLES, the table must be locked explicitly in the LOCK TABLES list.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Implementation of simple deadlock detection for metadata locks. This change is supposed to reduce number of ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors which occur when multi-statement transaction encounters conflicting metadata lock in cases when waiting is possible. The idea is not to fail ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error immediately when we encounter conflicting metadata lock. Instead we release all metadata locks acquired by current statement and start to wait until conflicting lock go away. To avoid deadlocks we use simple empiric which aborts waiting with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error if it turns out that somebody is waiting for metadata locks owned by this transaction. This patch also fixes bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed in case of ALTER". The bug was that concurrent execution of UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE statement as a part of multi-statement transaction that already has used table being updated and ALTER TABLE statement might have resulted of loss of isolation between this transaction and ALTER TABLE statement, which manifested itself as changes performed by ALTER TABLE becoming visible in transaction and wrong binary log order as a consequence. This problem occurred when UPDATE or MULTI-UPDATE's wait in mysql_lock_tables() call was aborted due to metadata lock upgrade performed by concurrent ALTER TABLE. After such abort all metadata locks held by transaction were released but transaction silently continued to be executed as if nothing has happened. We solve this problem by changing our code not to release all locks in such case. Instead we release only locks which were acquired by current statement and then try to reacquire them by restarting open/lock tables process. We piggyback on simple deadlock detector implementation since this change has to be done anyway for it.
16 years ago
Backport of: ------------------------------------------------------------ revno: 2617.68.10 committer: Dmitry Lenev <dlenev@mysql.com> branch nick: mysql-next-bg46673 timestamp: Tue 2009-09-01 19:57:05 +0400 message: Fix for bug #46673 "Deadlock between FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK and DML". Deadlocks occured when one concurrently executed transactions with several statements modifying data and FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK statement or SET READ_ONLY=1 statement. These deadlocks were introduced by the patch for WL 4284: "Transactional DDL locking"/Bug 989: "If DROP TABLE while there's an active transaction, wrong binlog order" which has changed FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK/SET READ_ONLY=1 to wait for pending transactions. What happened was that FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK blocked all further statements changing tables by setting global_read_lock global variable and has started waiting for all pending transactions to complete. Then one of those transactions tried to executed DML, detected that global_read_lock non-zero and tried to wait until global read lock will be released (i.e. global_read_lock becomes 0), indeed, this led to a deadlock. Proper solution for this problem should probably involve full integration of global read lock with metadata locking subsystem (which will allow to implement waiting for pending transactions without blocking DML in them). But since it requires significant changes another, short-term solution for the problem is implemented in this patch. Basically, this patch restores behavior of FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK/ SET READ_ONLY=1 before the patch for WL 4284/bug 989. By ensuring that extra references to TABLE_SHARE are not stored for active metadata locks it changes these statements not to wait for pending transactions. As result deadlock is eliminated. Note that this does not change the fact that active FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK lock or SET READ_ONLY=1 prevent modifications to tables as they also block transaction commits.
16 years ago
Backport of revno: 3685 Bug #48210 FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK deadlocks against concurrent CREATE PROCEDURE This deadlock occured between a) CREATE PROCEDURE (or other commands listed below) b) FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK If the execution of them happened in the following order: - a) opens a table (e.g. mysql.proc) - b) locks the global read lock (or GRL) - a) sleeps inside wait_if_global_read_lock() - b) increases refresh_version and sleeps waiting for old tables to go away Note that a) must start waiting on the GRL before FLUSH increases refresh_version. Otherwise a) won't wait on the GRL and instead close its tables for reopen, allowing FLUSH to complete and thus avoid the deadlock. With this patch the deadlock is avoided by making CREATE PROCEDURE acquire a protection against global read locks before it starts executing. This means that FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK will have to wait until CREATE PROCEDURE completes before acquiring the global read lock, thereby avoiding the deadlock. This is implemented by introducing a new SQL command flag called CF_PROTECT_AGAINST_GRL. Commands marked with this flag will acquire a GRL protection in the beginning of mysql_execute_command(). This patch adds the flag to CREATE, ALTER and DROP for PROCEDURE and FUNCTION, as well as CREATE USER, DROP USER, RENAME USER and REVOKE ALL. All these commands either call open_grant_tables() or open_system_table_for_updated() which make them susceptible for this deadlock. The patch also adds the CF_PROTECT_AGAINST_GRL flag to a number of commands that previously acquired GRL protection in their respective SQLCOM case in mysql_execute_command(). Test case that checks for GRL protection for CREATE PROCEDURE and CREATE USER added to mdl_sync.test.
16 years ago
Backport of revno: 3685 Bug #48210 FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK deadlocks against concurrent CREATE PROCEDURE This deadlock occured between a) CREATE PROCEDURE (or other commands listed below) b) FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK If the execution of them happened in the following order: - a) opens a table (e.g. mysql.proc) - b) locks the global read lock (or GRL) - a) sleeps inside wait_if_global_read_lock() - b) increases refresh_version and sleeps waiting for old tables to go away Note that a) must start waiting on the GRL before FLUSH increases refresh_version. Otherwise a) won't wait on the GRL and instead close its tables for reopen, allowing FLUSH to complete and thus avoid the deadlock. With this patch the deadlock is avoided by making CREATE PROCEDURE acquire a protection against global read locks before it starts executing. This means that FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK will have to wait until CREATE PROCEDURE completes before acquiring the global read lock, thereby avoiding the deadlock. This is implemented by introducing a new SQL command flag called CF_PROTECT_AGAINST_GRL. Commands marked with this flag will acquire a GRL protection in the beginning of mysql_execute_command(). This patch adds the flag to CREATE, ALTER and DROP for PROCEDURE and FUNCTION, as well as CREATE USER, DROP USER, RENAME USER and REVOKE ALL. All these commands either call open_grant_tables() or open_system_table_for_updated() which make them susceptible for this deadlock. The patch also adds the CF_PROTECT_AGAINST_GRL flag to a number of commands that previously acquired GRL protection in their respective SQLCOM case in mysql_execute_command(). Test case that checks for GRL protection for CREATE PROCEDURE and CREATE USER added to mdl_sync.test.
16 years ago
Backport of revno: 3685 Bug #48210 FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK deadlocks against concurrent CREATE PROCEDURE This deadlock occured between a) CREATE PROCEDURE (or other commands listed below) b) FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK If the execution of them happened in the following order: - a) opens a table (e.g. mysql.proc) - b) locks the global read lock (or GRL) - a) sleeps inside wait_if_global_read_lock() - b) increases refresh_version and sleeps waiting for old tables to go away Note that a) must start waiting on the GRL before FLUSH increases refresh_version. Otherwise a) won't wait on the GRL and instead close its tables for reopen, allowing FLUSH to complete and thus avoid the deadlock. With this patch the deadlock is avoided by making CREATE PROCEDURE acquire a protection against global read locks before it starts executing. This means that FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK will have to wait until CREATE PROCEDURE completes before acquiring the global read lock, thereby avoiding the deadlock. This is implemented by introducing a new SQL command flag called CF_PROTECT_AGAINST_GRL. Commands marked with this flag will acquire a GRL protection in the beginning of mysql_execute_command(). This patch adds the flag to CREATE, ALTER and DROP for PROCEDURE and FUNCTION, as well as CREATE USER, DROP USER, RENAME USER and REVOKE ALL. All these commands either call open_grant_tables() or open_system_table_for_updated() which make them susceptible for this deadlock. The patch also adds the CF_PROTECT_AGAINST_GRL flag to a number of commands that previously acquired GRL protection in their respective SQLCOM case in mysql_execute_command(). Test case that checks for GRL protection for CREATE PROCEDURE and CREATE USER added to mdl_sync.test.
16 years ago
Backport of revno: 3685 Bug #48210 FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK deadlocks against concurrent CREATE PROCEDURE This deadlock occured between a) CREATE PROCEDURE (or other commands listed below) b) FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK If the execution of them happened in the following order: - a) opens a table (e.g. mysql.proc) - b) locks the global read lock (or GRL) - a) sleeps inside wait_if_global_read_lock() - b) increases refresh_version and sleeps waiting for old tables to go away Note that a) must start waiting on the GRL before FLUSH increases refresh_version. Otherwise a) won't wait on the GRL and instead close its tables for reopen, allowing FLUSH to complete and thus avoid the deadlock. With this patch the deadlock is avoided by making CREATE PROCEDURE acquire a protection against global read locks before it starts executing. This means that FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK will have to wait until CREATE PROCEDURE completes before acquiring the global read lock, thereby avoiding the deadlock. This is implemented by introducing a new SQL command flag called CF_PROTECT_AGAINST_GRL. Commands marked with this flag will acquire a GRL protection in the beginning of mysql_execute_command(). This patch adds the flag to CREATE, ALTER and DROP for PROCEDURE and FUNCTION, as well as CREATE USER, DROP USER, RENAME USER and REVOKE ALL. All these commands either call open_grant_tables() or open_system_table_for_updated() which make them susceptible for this deadlock. The patch also adds the CF_PROTECT_AGAINST_GRL flag to a number of commands that previously acquired GRL protection in their respective SQLCOM case in mysql_execute_command(). Test case that checks for GRL protection for CREATE PROCEDURE and CREATE USER added to mdl_sync.test.
16 years ago
Backport of revno: 3685 Bug #48210 FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK deadlocks against concurrent CREATE PROCEDURE This deadlock occured between a) CREATE PROCEDURE (or other commands listed below) b) FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK If the execution of them happened in the following order: - a) opens a table (e.g. mysql.proc) - b) locks the global read lock (or GRL) - a) sleeps inside wait_if_global_read_lock() - b) increases refresh_version and sleeps waiting for old tables to go away Note that a) must start waiting on the GRL before FLUSH increases refresh_version. Otherwise a) won't wait on the GRL and instead close its tables for reopen, allowing FLUSH to complete and thus avoid the deadlock. With this patch the deadlock is avoided by making CREATE PROCEDURE acquire a protection against global read locks before it starts executing. This means that FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK will have to wait until CREATE PROCEDURE completes before acquiring the global read lock, thereby avoiding the deadlock. This is implemented by introducing a new SQL command flag called CF_PROTECT_AGAINST_GRL. Commands marked with this flag will acquire a GRL protection in the beginning of mysql_execute_command(). This patch adds the flag to CREATE, ALTER and DROP for PROCEDURE and FUNCTION, as well as CREATE USER, DROP USER, RENAME USER and REVOKE ALL. All these commands either call open_grant_tables() or open_system_table_for_updated() which make them susceptible for this deadlock. The patch also adds the CF_PROTECT_AGAINST_GRL flag to a number of commands that previously acquired GRL protection in their respective SQLCOM case in mysql_execute_command(). Test case that checks for GRL protection for CREATE PROCEDURE and CREATE USER added to mdl_sync.test.
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
Bug#49938: Failing assertion: inode or deadlock in fsp/fsp0fsp.c Bug#54678: InnoDB, TRUNCATE, ALTER, I_S SELECT, crash or deadlock - Incompatible change: truncate no longer resorts to a row by row delete if the storage engine does not support the truncate method. Consequently, the count of affected rows does not, in any case, reflect the actual number of rows. - Incompatible change: it is no longer possible to truncate a table that participates as a parent in a foreign key constraint, unless it is a self-referencing constraint (both parent and child are in the same table). To work around this incompatible change and still be able to truncate such tables, disable foreign checks with SET foreign_key_checks=0 before truncate. Alternatively, if foreign key checks are necessary, please use a DELETE statement without a WHERE condition. Problem description: The problem was that for storage engines that do not support truncate table via a external drop and recreate, such as InnoDB which implements truncate via a internal drop and recreate, the delete_all_rows method could be invoked with a shared metadata lock, causing problems if the engine needed exclusive access to some internal metadata. This problem originated with the fact that there is no truncate specific handler method, which ended up leading to a abuse of the delete_all_rows method that is primarily used for delete operations without a condition. Solution: The solution is to introduce a truncate handler method that is invoked when the engine does not support truncation via a table drop and recreate. This method is invoked under a exclusive metadata lock, so that there is only a single instance of the table when the method is invoked. Also, the method is not invoked and a error is thrown if the table is a parent in a non-self-referencing foreign key relationship. This was necessary to avoid inconsistency as some integrity checks are bypassed. This is inline with the fact that truncate is primarily a DDL operation that was designed to quickly remove all data from a table.
15 years ago
Bug#49938: Failing assertion: inode or deadlock in fsp/fsp0fsp.c Bug#54678: InnoDB, TRUNCATE, ALTER, I_S SELECT, crash or deadlock - Incompatible change: truncate no longer resorts to a row by row delete if the storage engine does not support the truncate method. Consequently, the count of affected rows does not, in any case, reflect the actual number of rows. - Incompatible change: it is no longer possible to truncate a table that participates as a parent in a foreign key constraint, unless it is a self-referencing constraint (both parent and child are in the same table). To work around this incompatible change and still be able to truncate such tables, disable foreign checks with SET foreign_key_checks=0 before truncate. Alternatively, if foreign key checks are necessary, please use a DELETE statement without a WHERE condition. Problem description: The problem was that for storage engines that do not support truncate table via a external drop and recreate, such as InnoDB which implements truncate via a internal drop and recreate, the delete_all_rows method could be invoked with a shared metadata lock, causing problems if the engine needed exclusive access to some internal metadata. This problem originated with the fact that there is no truncate specific handler method, which ended up leading to a abuse of the delete_all_rows method that is primarily used for delete operations without a condition. Solution: The solution is to introduce a truncate handler method that is invoked when the engine does not support truncation via a table drop and recreate. This method is invoked under a exclusive metadata lock, so that there is only a single instance of the table when the method is invoked. Also, the method is not invoked and a error is thrown if the table is a parent in a non-self-referencing foreign key relationship. This was necessary to avoid inconsistency as some integrity checks are bypassed. This is inline with the fact that truncate is primarily a DDL operation that was designed to quickly remove all data from a table.
15 years ago
Bug#49938: Failing assertion: inode or deadlock in fsp/fsp0fsp.c Bug#54678: InnoDB, TRUNCATE, ALTER, I_S SELECT, crash or deadlock - Incompatible change: truncate no longer resorts to a row by row delete if the storage engine does not support the truncate method. Consequently, the count of affected rows does not, in any case, reflect the actual number of rows. - Incompatible change: it is no longer possible to truncate a table that participates as a parent in a foreign key constraint, unless it is a self-referencing constraint (both parent and child are in the same table). To work around this incompatible change and still be able to truncate such tables, disable foreign checks with SET foreign_key_checks=0 before truncate. Alternatively, if foreign key checks are necessary, please use a DELETE statement without a WHERE condition. Problem description: The problem was that for storage engines that do not support truncate table via a external drop and recreate, such as InnoDB which implements truncate via a internal drop and recreate, the delete_all_rows method could be invoked with a shared metadata lock, causing problems if the engine needed exclusive access to some internal metadata. This problem originated with the fact that there is no truncate specific handler method, which ended up leading to a abuse of the delete_all_rows method that is primarily used for delete operations without a condition. Solution: The solution is to introduce a truncate handler method that is invoked when the engine does not support truncation via a table drop and recreate. This method is invoked under a exclusive metadata lock, so that there is only a single instance of the table when the method is invoked. Also, the method is not invoked and a error is thrown if the table is a parent in a non-self-referencing foreign key relationship. This was necessary to avoid inconsistency as some integrity checks are bypassed. This is inline with the fact that truncate is primarily a DDL operation that was designed to quickly remove all data from a table.
15 years ago
Bug#49938: Failing assertion: inode or deadlock in fsp/fsp0fsp.c Bug#54678: InnoDB, TRUNCATE, ALTER, I_S SELECT, crash or deadlock - Incompatible change: truncate no longer resorts to a row by row delete if the storage engine does not support the truncate method. Consequently, the count of affected rows does not, in any case, reflect the actual number of rows. - Incompatible change: it is no longer possible to truncate a table that participates as a parent in a foreign key constraint, unless it is a self-referencing constraint (both parent and child are in the same table). To work around this incompatible change and still be able to truncate such tables, disable foreign checks with SET foreign_key_checks=0 before truncate. Alternatively, if foreign key checks are necessary, please use a DELETE statement without a WHERE condition. Problem description: The problem was that for storage engines that do not support truncate table via a external drop and recreate, such as InnoDB which implements truncate via a internal drop and recreate, the delete_all_rows method could be invoked with a shared metadata lock, causing problems if the engine needed exclusive access to some internal metadata. This problem originated with the fact that there is no truncate specific handler method, which ended up leading to a abuse of the delete_all_rows method that is primarily used for delete operations without a condition. Solution: The solution is to introduce a truncate handler method that is invoked when the engine does not support truncation via a table drop and recreate. This method is invoked under a exclusive metadata lock, so that there is only a single instance of the table when the method is invoked. Also, the method is not invoked and a error is thrown if the table is a parent in a non-self-referencing foreign key relationship. This was necessary to avoid inconsistency as some integrity checks are bypassed. This is inline with the fact that truncate is primarily a DDL operation that was designed to quickly remove all data from a table.
15 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
Bug #56292 Deadlock with ALTER TABLE and MERGE tables ALTER TABLE on a MERGE table could cause a deadlock with two other connections if we reached a situation where: 1) A connection doing ALTER TABLE can't upgrade to MDL_EXCLUSIVE on the parent table, but holds TL_READ_NO_INSERT on the child tables. 2) A connection doing DELETE on a child table can't get TL_WRITE on it since ALTER TABLE holds TL_READ_NO_INSERT. 3) A connection doing SELECT on the parent table can't get TL_READ on the child tables since TL_WRITE is ahead in the lock queue, but holds MDL_SHARED_READ on the parent table preventing ALTER TABLE from upgrading. For regular tables, this deadlock is avoided by having ALTER TABLE take a MDL_SHARED_NO_WRITE metadata lock on the table. This prevents DELETE from acquiring MDL_SHARED_WRITE on the table before ALTER TABLE tries to upgrade to MDL_EXCLUSIVE. In the example above, SELECT would therefore not be blocked by the pending DELETE as DELETE would not be able to enter TL_WRITE in the table lock queue. This patch fixes the problem for merge tables by using the same metadata lock type for child tables as for the parent table. The child tables will in this case therefore be locked with MDL_SHARED_NO_WRITE, preventing DELETE from acquiring a metadata lock and enter into the table lock queue. Change in behavior: By taking the same metadata lock for child tables as for the parent table, LOCK TABLE on the parent table will now also implicitly lock the child tables. Since LOCK TABLE on the parent table now takes more than one metadata lock, it is possible for LOCK TABLE ... WRITE on the parent table or child tables to give ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error. Test case added to mdl_sync.test. Merge.test/.result has been updated to reflect the change to LOCK TABLE.
15 years ago
  1. #
  2. # We need the Debug Sync Facility.
  3. #
  4. --source include/have_debug_sync.inc
  5. # We need InnoDB tables for some of the tests.
  6. --source include/have_innodb.inc
  7. # Save the initial number of concurrent sessions.
  8. --source include/count_sessions.inc
  9. # Clean up resources used in this test case.
  10. --disable_warnings
  11. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'RESET';
  12. --enable_warnings
  13. #
  14. # Test the case of when a exclusive lock request waits for a
  15. # shared lock being upgraded to a exclusive lock.
  16. #
  17. connect (con1,localhost,root,,test,,);
  18. connect (con2,localhost,root,,test,,);
  19. connect (con3,localhost,root,,test,,);
  20. connection default;
  21. --disable_warnings
  22. drop table if exists t1,t2,t3;
  23. --enable_warnings
  24. create table t1 (i int);
  25. create table t2 (i int);
  26. --echo connection: default
  27. lock tables t2 read;
  28. connection con1;
  29. --echo connection: con1
  30. set debug_sync='mdl_upgrade_shared_lock_to_exclusive SIGNAL parked WAIT_FOR go';
  31. --send alter table t1 rename t3
  32. connection default;
  33. --echo connection: default
  34. set debug_sync= 'now WAIT_FOR parked';
  35. connection con2;
  36. --echo connection: con2
  37. set debug_sync='mdl_acquire_lock_wait SIGNAL go';
  38. --send drop table t1,t2
  39. connection con1;
  40. --echo connection: con1
  41. --reap
  42. connection default;
  43. --echo connection: default
  44. unlock tables;
  45. connection con2;
  46. --echo connection: con2
  47. --error ER_BAD_TABLE_ERROR
  48. --reap
  49. connection default;
  50. drop table t3;
  51. disconnect con1;
  52. disconnect con2;
  53. disconnect con3;
  54. # Clean up resources used in this test case.
  55. --disable_warnings
  56. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'RESET';
  57. --enable_warnings
  58. --echo #
  59. --echo # Basic test coverage for type-of-operation aware metadata locks.
  60. --echo #
  61. --disable_warnings
  62. drop table if exists t1, t2, t3;
  63. --enable_warnings
  64. connect(mdl_con1,localhost,root,,);
  65. connect(mdl_con2,localhost,root,,);
  66. connect(mdl_con3,localhost,root,,);
  67. connection default;
  68. set debug_sync= 'RESET';
  69. create table t1 (c1 int);
  70. --echo #
  71. --echo # A) First let us check compatibility rules between differend kinds of
  72. --echo # type-of-operation aware metadata locks.
  73. --echo # Of course, these rules are already covered by the tests scattered
  74. --echo # across the test suite. But it still makes sense to have one place
  75. --echo # which covers all of them.
  76. --echo #
  77. --echo # 1) Acquire S (simple shared) lock on the table (by using HANDLER):
  78. --echo #
  79. handler t1 open;
  80. --echo #
  81. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  82. connection mdl_con1;
  83. --echo # Check that S, SH, SR and SW locks are compatible with it.
  84. handler t1 open t;
  85. handler t close;
  86. select column_name from information_schema.columns where
  87. table_schema='test' and table_name='t1';
  88. select count(*) from t1;
  89. insert into t1 values (1), (1);
  90. --echo # Check that SNW lock is compatible with it. To do this use ALTER TABLE
  91. --echo # which will fail after opening the table and thus obtaining SNW metadata
  92. --echo # lock.
  93. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  94. alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  95. --echo # Check that SNRW lock is compatible with S lock.
  96. lock table t1 write;
  97. insert into t1 values (1);
  98. unlock tables;
  99. --echo # Check that X lock is incompatible with S lock.
  100. --echo # Sending:
  101. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  102. --echo #
  103. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  104. connection mdl_con2;
  105. --echo # Check that the above RENAME is blocked because of S lock.
  106. let $wait_condition=
  107. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  108. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  109. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  110. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  111. --echo #
  112. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  113. connection default;
  114. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE.
  115. handler t1 close;
  116. --echo #
  117. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  118. connection mdl_con1;
  119. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE.
  120. --reap
  121. --echo # Restore the original state of the things.
  122. rename table t2 to t1;
  123. --echo #
  124. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  125. connection default;
  126. handler t1 open;
  127. --echo #
  128. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  129. connection mdl_con1;
  130. --echo # Check that upgrade from SNW to X is blocked by presence of S lock.
  131. --echo # Sending:
  132. --send alter table t1 add column c2 int;
  133. --echo #
  134. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  135. connection mdl_con2;
  136. --echo # Check that the above ALTER TABLE is blocked because of S lock.
  137. let $wait_condition=
  138. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  139. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  140. info = "alter table t1 add column c2 int";
  141. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  142. --echo #
  143. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  144. connection default;
  145. --echo # Unblock ALTER TABLE.
  146. handler t1 close;
  147. --echo #
  148. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  149. connection mdl_con1;
  150. --echo # Reaping ALTER TABLE.
  151. --reap
  152. --echo # Restore the original state of the things.
  153. alter table t1 drop column c2;
  154. --echo #
  155. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  156. connection default;
  157. handler t1 open;
  158. --echo #
  159. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  160. connection mdl_con1;
  161. --echo # Check that upgrade from SNRW to X is blocked by presence of S lock.
  162. lock table t1 write;
  163. --echo # Sending:
  164. --send alter table t1 add column c2 int;
  165. --echo #
  166. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  167. connection mdl_con2;
  168. --echo # Check that the above upgrade of SNRW to X in ALTER TABLE is blocked
  169. --echo # because of S lock.
  170. let $wait_condition=
  171. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  172. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  173. info = "alter table t1 add column c2 int";
  174. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  175. --echo #
  176. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  177. connection default;
  178. --echo # Unblock ALTER TABLE.
  179. handler t1 close;
  180. --echo #
  181. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  182. connection mdl_con1;
  183. --echo # Reaping ALTER TABLE.
  184. --reap
  185. --echo # Restore the original state of the things.
  186. alter table t1 drop column c2;
  187. unlock tables;
  188. --echo #
  189. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  190. connection default;
  191. --echo #
  192. --echo # 2) Acquire SH (shared high-priority) lock on the table.
  193. --echo # We have to involve DEBUG_SYNC facility for this as usually
  194. --echo # such kind of locks are short-lived.
  195. --echo #
  196. set debug_sync= 'after_open_table_mdl_shared SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR finish';
  197. --echo # Sending:
  198. --send select table_name, table_type, auto_increment, table_comment from information_schema.tables where table_schema='test' and table_name='t1';
  199. --echo #
  200. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  201. connection mdl_con1;
  202. set debug_sync= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  203. --echo # Check that S, SH, SR and SW locks are compatible with it.
  204. handler t1 open;
  205. handler t1 close;
  206. select column_name from information_schema.columns where
  207. table_schema='test' and table_name='t1';
  208. select count(*) from t1;
  209. insert into t1 values (1);
  210. --echo # Check that SNW lock is compatible with it. To do this use ALTER TABLE
  211. --echo # which will fail after opening the table and thus obtaining SNW metadata
  212. --echo # lock.
  213. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  214. alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  215. --echo # Check that SNRW lock is compatible with SH lock.
  216. lock table t1 write;
  217. delete from t1 limit 1;
  218. unlock tables;
  219. --echo # Check that X lock is incompatible with SH lock.
  220. --echo # Sending:
  221. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  222. --echo #
  223. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  224. connection mdl_con2;
  225. --echo # Check that the above RENAME is blocked because of SH lock.
  226. let $wait_condition=
  227. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  228. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  229. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  230. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  231. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE.
  232. set debug_sync= 'now SIGNAL finish';
  233. --echo #
  234. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  235. connection default;
  236. --echo # Reaping SELECT ... FROM I_S.
  237. --reap
  238. --echo #
  239. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  240. connection mdl_con1;
  241. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE.
  242. --reap
  243. --echo # Restore the original state of the things.
  244. rename table t2 to t1;
  245. --echo #
  246. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  247. connection default;
  248. set debug_sync= 'after_open_table_mdl_shared SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR finish';
  249. --echo # Sending:
  250. --send select table_name, table_type, auto_increment, table_comment from information_schema.tables where table_schema='test' and table_name='t1';
  251. --echo #
  252. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  253. connection mdl_con1;
  254. set debug_sync= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  255. --echo # Check that upgrade from SNW to X is blocked by presence of SH lock.
  256. --echo # Sending:
  257. --send alter table t1 add column c2 int;
  258. --echo #
  259. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  260. connection mdl_con2;
  261. --echo # Check that the above ALTER TABLE is blocked because of SH lock.
  262. let $wait_condition=
  263. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  264. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  265. info = "alter table t1 add column c2 int";
  266. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  267. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE.
  268. set debug_sync= 'now SIGNAL finish';
  269. --echo #
  270. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  271. connection default;
  272. --echo # Reaping SELECT ... FROM I_S.
  273. --reap
  274. --echo #
  275. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  276. connection mdl_con1;
  277. --echo # Reaping ALTER TABLE.
  278. --reap
  279. --echo # Restore the original state of the things.
  280. alter table t1 drop column c2;
  281. --echo #
  282. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  283. connection default;
  284. set debug_sync= 'after_open_table_mdl_shared SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR finish';
  285. --send select table_name, table_type, auto_increment, table_comment from information_schema.tables where table_schema='test' and table_name='t1';
  286. --echo #
  287. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  288. connection mdl_con1;
  289. set debug_sync= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  290. --echo # Check that upgrade from SNRW to X is blocked by presence of S lock.
  291. lock table t1 write;
  292. --echo # Sending:
  293. --send alter table t1 add column c2 int;
  294. --echo #
  295. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  296. connection mdl_con2;
  297. --echo # Check that the above upgrade of SNRW to X in ALTER TABLE is blocked
  298. --echo # because of S lock.
  299. let $wait_condition=
  300. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  301. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  302. info = "alter table t1 add column c2 int";
  303. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  304. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE.
  305. set debug_sync= 'now SIGNAL finish';
  306. --echo #
  307. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  308. connection default;
  309. --echo # Reaping SELECT ... FROM I_S.
  310. --reap
  311. --echo #
  312. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  313. connection mdl_con1;
  314. --echo # Reaping ALTER TABLE.
  315. --reap
  316. --echo # Restore the original state of the things.
  317. alter table t1 drop column c2;
  318. unlock tables;
  319. --echo #
  320. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  321. connection default;
  322. --echo #
  323. --echo #
  324. --echo # 3) Acquire SR lock on the table.
  325. --echo #
  326. --echo #
  327. begin;
  328. select count(*) from t1;
  329. --echo #
  330. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  331. connection mdl_con1;
  332. --echo # Check that S, SH, SR and SW locks are compatible with it.
  333. handler t1 open;
  334. handler t1 close;
  335. select column_name from information_schema.columns where
  336. table_schema='test' and table_name='t1';
  337. select count(*) from t1;
  338. insert into t1 values (1);
  339. --echo # Check that SNW lock is compatible with it. To do this use ALTER TABLE
  340. --echo # which will fail after opening the table and thus obtaining SNW metadata
  341. --echo # lock.
  342. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  343. alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  344. --echo # Check that SNRW lock is not compatible with SR lock.
  345. --echo # Sending:
  346. --send lock table t1 write;
  347. --echo #
  348. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  349. connection default;
  350. --echo # Check that the above LOCK TABLES is blocked because of SR lock.
  351. let $wait_condition=
  352. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  353. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  354. info = "lock table t1 write";
  355. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  356. --echo # Unblock LOCK TABLES.
  357. commit;
  358. --echo #
  359. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  360. connection mdl_con1;
  361. --echo # Reaping LOCK TABLES.
  362. --reap
  363. delete from t1 limit 1;
  364. unlock tables;
  365. --echo #
  366. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  367. connection default;
  368. begin;
  369. select count(*) from t1;
  370. --echo #
  371. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  372. connection mdl_con1;
  373. --echo # Check that X lock is incompatible with SR lock.
  374. --echo # Sending:
  375. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  376. --echo #
  377. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  378. connection mdl_con2;
  379. --echo # Check that the above RENAME is blocked because of SR lock.
  380. let $wait_condition=
  381. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  382. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  383. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  384. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  385. --echo #
  386. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  387. connection default;
  388. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE.
  389. commit;
  390. --echo #
  391. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  392. connection mdl_con1;
  393. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE.
  394. --reap
  395. --echo # Restore the original state of the things.
  396. rename table t2 to t1;
  397. --echo #
  398. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  399. connection default;
  400. begin;
  401. select count(*) from t1;
  402. --echo #
  403. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  404. connection mdl_con1;
  405. --echo # Check that upgrade from SNW to X is blocked by presence of SR lock.
  406. --echo # Sending:
  407. --send alter table t1 add column c2 int;
  408. --echo #
  409. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  410. connection mdl_con2;
  411. --echo # Check that the above ALTER TABLE is blocked because of SR lock.
  412. let $wait_condition=
  413. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  414. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  415. info = "alter table t1 add column c2 int";
  416. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  417. --echo #
  418. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  419. connection default;
  420. --echo # Unblock ALTER TABLE.
  421. commit;
  422. --echo #
  423. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  424. connection mdl_con1;
  425. --echo # Reaping ALTER TABLE.
  426. --reap
  427. --echo # Restore the original state of the things.
  428. alter table t1 drop column c2;
  429. --echo #
  430. --echo # There is no need to check that upgrade from SNRW to X is blocked
  431. --echo # by presence of SR lock because SNRW is incompatible with SR anyway.
  432. --echo #
  433. --echo #
  434. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  435. connection default;
  436. --echo #
  437. --echo #
  438. --echo # 4) Acquire SW lock on the table.
  439. --echo #
  440. --echo #
  441. begin;
  442. insert into t1 values (1);
  443. --echo #
  444. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  445. connection mdl_con1;
  446. --echo # Check that S, SH, SR and SW locks are compatible with it.
  447. handler t1 open;
  448. handler t1 close;
  449. select column_name from information_schema.columns where
  450. table_schema='test' and table_name='t1';
  451. --echo # Disable result log to make test robust against
  452. --echo # effects of concurrent insert.
  453. --disable_result_log
  454. select * from t1;
  455. --enable_result_log
  456. insert into t1 values (1);
  457. --echo # Check that SNW lock is not compatible with SW lock.
  458. --echo # Again we use ALTER TABLE which fails after opening
  459. --echo # the table to avoid upgrade of SNW -> X.
  460. --echo # Sending:
  461. --send alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  462. --echo #
  463. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  464. connection default;
  465. --echo # Check that the above ALTER TABLE is blocked because of SW lock.
  466. let $wait_condition=
  467. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  468. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  469. info = "alter table t1 add primary key (c1)";
  470. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  471. --echo # Unblock ALTER TABLE.
  472. commit;
  473. --echo #
  474. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  475. connection mdl_con1;
  476. --echo # Reaping ALTER TABLE.
  477. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  478. --reap
  479. --echo #
  480. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  481. connection default;
  482. begin;
  483. insert into t1 values (1);
  484. --echo #
  485. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  486. connection mdl_con1;
  487. --echo # Check that SNRW lock is not compatible with SW lock.
  488. --echo # Sending:
  489. --send lock table t1 write;
  490. --echo #
  491. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  492. connection default;
  493. --echo # Check that the above LOCK TABLES is blocked because of SW lock.
  494. let $wait_condition=
  495. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  496. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  497. info = "lock table t1 write";
  498. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  499. --echo # Unblock LOCK TABLES.
  500. commit;
  501. --echo #
  502. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  503. connection mdl_con1;
  504. --echo # Reaping LOCK TABLES.
  505. --reap
  506. delete from t1 limit 2;
  507. unlock tables;
  508. --echo #
  509. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  510. connection default;
  511. begin;
  512. insert into t1 values (1);
  513. --echo #
  514. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  515. connection mdl_con1;
  516. --echo # Check that X lock is incompatible with SW lock.
  517. --echo # Sending:
  518. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  519. --echo #
  520. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  521. connection mdl_con2;
  522. --echo # Check that the above RENAME is blocked because of SW lock.
  523. let $wait_condition=
  524. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  525. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  526. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  527. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  528. --echo #
  529. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  530. connection default;
  531. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE.
  532. commit;
  533. --echo #
  534. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  535. connection mdl_con1;
  536. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE.
  537. --reap
  538. --echo # Restore the original state of the things.
  539. rename table t2 to t1;
  540. --echo #
  541. --echo # There is no need to check that upgrade from SNW/SNRW to X is
  542. --echo # blocked by presence of SW lock because SNW/SNRW is incompatible
  543. --echo # with SW anyway.
  544. --echo #
  545. --echo #
  546. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  547. connection default;
  548. --echo #
  549. --echo #
  550. --echo # 5) Acquire SNW lock on the table. We have to use DEBUG_SYNC for
  551. --echo # this, to prevent SNW from being immediately upgraded to X.
  552. --echo #
  553. set debug_sync= 'after_open_table_mdl_shared SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR finish';
  554. --echo # Sending:
  555. --send alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  556. --echo #
  557. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  558. connection mdl_con1;
  559. set debug_sync= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  560. --echo # Check that S, SH and SR locks are compatible with it.
  561. handler t1 open;
  562. handler t1 close;
  563. select column_name from information_schema.columns where
  564. table_schema='test' and table_name='t1';
  565. select count(*) from t1;
  566. --echo # Check that SW lock is incompatible with SNW lock.
  567. --echo # Sending:
  568. --send delete from t1 limit 2;
  569. --echo #
  570. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  571. connection mdl_con2;
  572. --echo # Check that the above DELETE is blocked because of SNW lock.
  573. let $wait_condition=
  574. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  575. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  576. info = "delete from t1 limit 2";
  577. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  578. --echo # Unblock ALTER and thus DELETE.
  579. set debug_sync= 'now SIGNAL finish';
  580. --echo #
  581. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  582. connection default;
  583. --echo # Reaping ALTER TABLE.
  584. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  585. --reap
  586. --echo #
  587. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  588. connection mdl_con1;
  589. --echo # Reaping DELETE.
  590. --reap
  591. --echo #
  592. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  593. connection default;
  594. set debug_sync= 'after_open_table_mdl_shared SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR finish';
  595. --echo # Sending:
  596. --send alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  597. --echo #
  598. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  599. connection mdl_con1;
  600. set debug_sync= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  601. --echo # Check that SNW lock is incompatible with SNW lock.
  602. --echo # Sending:
  603. --send alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  604. --echo #
  605. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  606. connection mdl_con2;
  607. --echo # Check that the above ALTER is blocked because of SNW lock.
  608. let $wait_condition=
  609. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  610. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  611. info = "alter table t1 add primary key (c1)";
  612. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  613. --echo # Unblock ALTERs.
  614. set debug_sync= 'now SIGNAL finish';
  615. --echo #
  616. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  617. connection default;
  618. --echo # Reaping first ALTER TABLE.
  619. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  620. --reap
  621. --echo #
  622. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  623. connection mdl_con1;
  624. --echo # Reaping another ALTER TABLE.
  625. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  626. --reap
  627. --echo #
  628. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  629. connection default;
  630. set debug_sync= 'after_open_table_mdl_shared SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR finish';
  631. --echo # Sending:
  632. --send alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  633. --echo #
  634. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  635. connection mdl_con1;
  636. set debug_sync= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  637. --echo # Check that SNRW lock is incompatible with SNW lock.
  638. --echo # Sending:
  639. --send lock table t1 write;
  640. --echo #
  641. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  642. connection mdl_con2;
  643. --echo # Check that the above LOCK TABLES is blocked because of SNW lock.
  644. let $wait_condition=
  645. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  646. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  647. info = "lock table t1 write";
  648. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  649. --echo # Unblock ALTER and thus LOCK TABLES.
  650. set debug_sync= 'now SIGNAL finish';
  651. --echo #
  652. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  653. connection default;
  654. --echo # Reaping ALTER TABLE.
  655. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  656. --reap
  657. --echo #
  658. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  659. connection mdl_con1;
  660. --echo # Reaping LOCK TABLES
  661. --reap
  662. insert into t1 values (1);
  663. unlock tables;
  664. --echo #
  665. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  666. connection default;
  667. set debug_sync= 'after_open_table_mdl_shared SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR finish';
  668. --echo # Sending:
  669. --send alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  670. --echo #
  671. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  672. connection mdl_con1;
  673. set debug_sync= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  674. --echo # Check that X lock is incompatible with SNW lock.
  675. --echo # Sending:
  676. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  677. --echo #
  678. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  679. connection mdl_con2;
  680. --echo # Check that the above RENAME is blocked because of SNW lock.
  681. let $wait_condition=
  682. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  683. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  684. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  685. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  686. --echo # Unblock ALTER and thus RENAME TABLE.
  687. set debug_sync= 'now SIGNAL finish';
  688. --echo #
  689. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  690. connection default;
  691. --echo # Reaping ALTER TABLE.
  692. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  693. --reap
  694. --echo #
  695. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  696. connection mdl_con1;
  697. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE
  698. --reap
  699. --echo # Revert back to original state of things.
  700. rename table t2 to t1;
  701. --echo #
  702. --echo # There is no need to check that upgrade from SNW/SNRW to X is
  703. --echo # blocked by presence of another SNW lock because SNW/SNRW is
  704. --echo # incompatible with SNW anyway.
  705. --echo #
  706. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  707. connection default;
  708. --echo #
  709. --echo #
  710. --echo # 6) Acquire SNRW lock on the table.
  711. --echo #
  712. --echo #
  713. lock table t1 write;
  714. --echo #
  715. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  716. connection mdl_con1;
  717. --echo # Check that S and SH locks are compatible with it.
  718. handler t1 open;
  719. handler t1 close;
  720. select column_name from information_schema.columns where
  721. table_schema='test' and table_name='t1';
  722. --echo # Check that SR lock is incompatible with SNRW lock.
  723. --echo # Sending:
  724. --send select count(*) from t1;
  725. --echo #
  726. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  727. connection default;
  728. --echo # Check that the above SELECT is blocked because of SNRW lock.
  729. let $wait_condition=
  730. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  731. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  732. info = "select count(*) from t1";
  733. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  734. --echo # Unblock SELECT.
  735. unlock tables;
  736. --echo #
  737. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  738. connection mdl_con1;
  739. --echo # Reaping SELECT.
  740. --reap
  741. --echo #
  742. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  743. connection default;
  744. lock table t1 write;
  745. --echo #
  746. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  747. connection mdl_con1;
  748. --echo # Check that SW lock is incompatible with SNRW lock.
  749. --echo # Sending:
  750. --send delete from t1 limit 1;
  751. --echo #
  752. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  753. connection default;
  754. --echo # Check that the above DELETE is blocked because of SNRW lock.
  755. let $wait_condition=
  756. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  757. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  758. info = "delete from t1 limit 1";
  759. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  760. --echo # Unblock DELETE.
  761. unlock tables;
  762. --echo #
  763. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  764. connection mdl_con1;
  765. --echo # Reaping DELETE.
  766. --reap
  767. --echo #
  768. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  769. connection default;
  770. lock table t1 write;
  771. --echo #
  772. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  773. connection mdl_con1;
  774. --echo # Check that SNW lock is incompatible with SNRW lock.
  775. --echo # Sending:
  776. --send alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  777. --echo #
  778. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  779. connection default;
  780. --echo # Check that the above ALTER is blocked because of UNWR lock.
  781. let $wait_condition=
  782. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  783. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  784. info = "alter table t1 add primary key (c1)";
  785. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  786. --echo # Unblock ALTER.
  787. unlock tables;
  788. --echo #
  789. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  790. connection mdl_con1;
  791. --echo # Reaping ALTER TABLE.
  792. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  793. --reap
  794. --echo #
  795. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  796. connection default;
  797. lock table t1 write;
  798. --echo #
  799. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  800. connection mdl_con1;
  801. --echo # Check that SNRW lock is incompatible with SNRW lock.
  802. --echo # Sending:
  803. --send lock table t1 write;
  804. --echo #
  805. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  806. connection default;
  807. --echo # Check that the above LOCK TABLES is blocked because of SNRW lock.
  808. let $wait_condition=
  809. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  810. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  811. info = "lock table t1 write";
  812. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  813. --echo # Unblock waiting LOCK TABLES.
  814. unlock tables;
  815. --echo #
  816. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  817. connection mdl_con1;
  818. --echo # Reaping LOCK TABLES
  819. --reap
  820. insert into t1 values (1);
  821. unlock tables;
  822. --echo #
  823. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  824. connection default;
  825. lock table t1 write;
  826. --echo #
  827. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  828. connection mdl_con1;
  829. --echo # Check that X lock is incompatible with SNRW lock.
  830. --echo # Sending:
  831. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  832. --echo #
  833. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  834. connection default;
  835. --echo # Check that the above RENAME is blocked because of SNRW lock.
  836. let $wait_condition=
  837. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  838. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  839. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  840. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  841. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE
  842. unlock tables;
  843. --echo #
  844. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  845. connection mdl_con1;
  846. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE
  847. --reap
  848. --echo # Revert back to original state of things.
  849. rename table t2 to t1;
  850. --echo #
  851. --echo # There is no need to check that upgrade from SNW/SNRW to X is
  852. --echo # blocked by presence of another SNRW lock because SNW/SNRW is
  853. --echo # incompatible with SNRW anyway.
  854. --echo #
  855. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  856. connection default;
  857. --echo #
  858. --echo #
  859. --echo # 7) Now do the same round of tests for X lock. We use additional
  860. --echo # table to get long-lived lock of this type.
  861. --echo #
  862. create table t2 (c1 int);
  863. --echo #
  864. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  865. connection mdl_con2;
  866. --echo # Take a lock on t2, so RENAME TABLE t1 TO t2 will get blocked
  867. --echo # after acquiring X lock on t1.
  868. lock tables t2 read;
  869. --echo #
  870. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  871. connection default;
  872. --echo # Sending:
  873. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  874. --echo #
  875. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  876. connection mdl_con1;
  877. --echo # Check that RENAME has acquired X lock on t1 and is waiting for t2.
  878. let $wait_condition=
  879. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  880. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  881. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  882. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  883. --echo # Check that S lock in incompatible with X lock.
  884. --echo # Sending:
  885. --send handler t1 open;
  886. --echo #
  887. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  888. connection mdl_con2;
  889. --echo # Check that the above HANDLER statement is blocked because of X lock.
  890. let $wait_condition=
  891. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  892. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  893. info = "handler t1 open";
  894. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  895. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE
  896. unlock tables;
  897. --echo #
  898. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  899. connection default;
  900. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE.
  901. --error ER_TABLE_EXISTS_ERROR
  902. --reap
  903. --echo #
  904. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  905. connection mdl_con1;
  906. --echo # Reaping HANDLER.
  907. --reap
  908. handler t1 close;
  909. --echo #
  910. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  911. connection mdl_con2;
  912. --echo # Prepare for blocking RENAME TABLE.
  913. lock tables t2 read;
  914. --echo #
  915. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  916. connection default;
  917. --echo # Sending:
  918. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  919. --echo #
  920. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  921. connection mdl_con1;
  922. --echo # Check that RENAME has acquired X lock on t1 and is waiting for t2.
  923. let $wait_condition=
  924. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  925. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  926. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  927. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  928. --echo # Check that SH lock in incompatible with X lock.
  929. --echo # Sending:
  930. --send select column_name from information_schema.columns where table_schema='test' and table_name='t1';
  931. --echo #
  932. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  933. connection mdl_con2;
  934. --echo # Check that the above SELECT ... FROM I_S ... statement is blocked
  935. --echo # because of X lock.
  936. let $wait_condition=
  937. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  938. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  939. info like "select column_name from information_schema.columns%";
  940. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  941. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE
  942. unlock tables;
  943. --echo #
  944. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  945. connection default;
  946. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE.
  947. --error ER_TABLE_EXISTS_ERROR
  948. --reap
  949. --echo #
  950. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  951. connection mdl_con1;
  952. --echo # Reaping SELECT ... FROM I_S.
  953. --reap
  954. --echo #
  955. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  956. connection mdl_con2;
  957. --echo # Prepare for blocking RENAME TABLE.
  958. lock tables t2 read;
  959. --echo #
  960. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  961. connection default;
  962. --echo # Sending:
  963. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  964. --echo #
  965. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  966. connection mdl_con1;
  967. --echo # Check that RENAME has acquired X lock on t1 and is waiting for t2.
  968. let $wait_condition=
  969. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  970. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  971. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  972. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  973. --echo # Check that SR lock in incompatible with X lock.
  974. --echo # Sending:
  975. --send select count(*) from t1;
  976. --echo #
  977. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  978. connection mdl_con2;
  979. --echo # Check that the above SELECT statement is blocked
  980. --echo # because of X lock.
  981. let $wait_condition=
  982. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  983. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  984. info = "select count(*) from t1";
  985. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  986. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE
  987. unlock tables;
  988. --echo #
  989. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  990. connection default;
  991. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE.
  992. --error ER_TABLE_EXISTS_ERROR
  993. --reap
  994. --echo #
  995. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  996. connection mdl_con1;
  997. --echo # Reaping SELECT.
  998. --reap
  999. --echo #
  1000. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1001. connection mdl_con2;
  1002. --echo # Prepare for blocking RENAME TABLE.
  1003. lock tables t2 read;
  1004. --echo #
  1005. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1006. connection default;
  1007. --echo # Sending:
  1008. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  1009. --echo #
  1010. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1011. connection mdl_con1;
  1012. --echo # Check that RENAME has acquired X lock on t1 and is waiting for t2.
  1013. let $wait_condition=
  1014. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1015. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1016. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  1017. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1018. --echo # Check that SW lock in incompatible with X lock.
  1019. --echo # Sending:
  1020. --send delete from t1 limit 1;
  1021. --echo #
  1022. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1023. connection mdl_con2;
  1024. --echo # Check that the above DELETE statement is blocked
  1025. --echo # because of X lock.
  1026. let $wait_condition=
  1027. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1028. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1029. info = "delete from t1 limit 1";
  1030. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1031. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE
  1032. unlock tables;
  1033. --echo #
  1034. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1035. connection default;
  1036. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE.
  1037. --error ER_TABLE_EXISTS_ERROR
  1038. --reap
  1039. --echo #
  1040. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1041. connection mdl_con1;
  1042. --echo # Reaping DELETE.
  1043. --reap
  1044. --echo #
  1045. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1046. connection mdl_con2;
  1047. --echo # Prepare for blocking RENAME TABLE.
  1048. lock tables t2 read;
  1049. --echo #
  1050. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1051. connection default;
  1052. --echo # Sending:
  1053. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  1054. --echo #
  1055. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1056. connection mdl_con1;
  1057. --echo # Check that RENAME has acquired X lock on t1 and is waiting for t2.
  1058. let $wait_condition=
  1059. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1060. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1061. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  1062. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1063. --echo # Check that SNW lock is incompatible with X lock.
  1064. --echo # Sending:
  1065. --send alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  1066. --echo #
  1067. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1068. connection mdl_con2;
  1069. --echo # Check that the above ALTER statement is blocked
  1070. --echo # because of X lock.
  1071. let $wait_condition=
  1072. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1073. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1074. info = "alter table t1 add primary key (c1)";
  1075. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1076. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE
  1077. unlock tables;
  1078. --echo #
  1079. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1080. connection default;
  1081. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE
  1082. --error ER_TABLE_EXISTS_ERROR
  1083. --reap
  1084. --echo #
  1085. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1086. connection mdl_con1;
  1087. --echo # Reaping ALTER.
  1088. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  1089. --reap
  1090. --echo #
  1091. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1092. connection mdl_con2;
  1093. --echo # Prepare for blocking RENAME TABLE.
  1094. lock tables t2 read;
  1095. --echo #
  1096. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1097. connection default;
  1098. --echo # Sending:
  1099. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  1100. --echo #
  1101. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1102. connection mdl_con1;
  1103. --echo # Check that RENAME has acquired X lock on t1 and is waiting for t2.
  1104. let $wait_condition=
  1105. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1106. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1107. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  1108. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1109. --echo # Check that SNRW lock is incompatible with X lock.
  1110. --echo # Sending:
  1111. --send lock table t1 write;
  1112. --echo #
  1113. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1114. connection mdl_con2;
  1115. --echo # Check that the above LOCK TABLE statement is blocked
  1116. --echo # because of X lock.
  1117. let $wait_condition=
  1118. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1119. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1120. info = "lock table t1 write";
  1121. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1122. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE
  1123. unlock tables;
  1124. --echo #
  1125. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1126. connection default;
  1127. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE
  1128. --error ER_TABLE_EXISTS_ERROR
  1129. --reap
  1130. --echo #
  1131. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1132. connection mdl_con1;
  1133. --echo # Reaping LOCK TABLE.
  1134. --reap
  1135. unlock tables;
  1136. --echo #
  1137. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1138. connection mdl_con2;
  1139. --echo # Prepare for blocking RENAME TABLE.
  1140. lock tables t2 read;
  1141. --echo #
  1142. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1143. connection default;
  1144. --echo # Sending:
  1145. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  1146. --echo #
  1147. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1148. connection mdl_con1;
  1149. --echo # Check that RENAME has acquired X lock on t1 and is waiting for t2.
  1150. let $wait_condition=
  1151. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1152. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1153. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  1154. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1155. --echo # Check that X lock is incompatible with X lock.
  1156. --echo # Sending:
  1157. --send rename table t1 to t3;
  1158. --echo #
  1159. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1160. connection mdl_con2;
  1161. --echo # Check that the above RENAME statement is blocked
  1162. --echo # because of X lock.
  1163. let $wait_condition=
  1164. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1165. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1166. info = "rename table t1 to t3";
  1167. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1168. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE
  1169. unlock tables;
  1170. --echo #
  1171. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1172. connection default;
  1173. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE
  1174. --error ER_TABLE_EXISTS_ERROR
  1175. --reap
  1176. --echo #
  1177. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1178. connection mdl_con1;
  1179. --echo # Reaping RENAME.
  1180. --reap
  1181. rename table t3 to t1;
  1182. --echo #
  1183. --echo # B) Now let us test compatibility in cases when both locks
  1184. --echo # are pending. I.e. let us test rules for priorities between
  1185. --echo # different types of metadata locks.
  1186. --echo #
  1187. --echo #
  1188. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1189. connection mdl_con2;
  1190. --echo #
  1191. --echo # 1) Check compatibility for pending SNW lock.
  1192. --echo #
  1193. --echo # Acquire SW lock in order to create pending SNW lock later.
  1194. begin;
  1195. insert into t1 values (1);
  1196. --echo #
  1197. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1198. connection default;
  1199. --echo # Add pending SNW lock.
  1200. --echo # Sending:
  1201. --send alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  1202. --echo #
  1203. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1204. connection mdl_con1;
  1205. --echo # Check that ALTER TABLE is waiting with pending SNW lock.
  1206. let $wait_condition=
  1207. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1208. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1209. info = "alter table t1 add primary key (c1)";
  1210. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1211. --echo # Check that S, SH and SR locks are compatible with pending SNW
  1212. handler t1 open t;
  1213. handler t close;
  1214. select column_name from information_schema.columns where
  1215. table_schema='test' and table_name='t1';
  1216. select count(*) from t1;
  1217. --echo # Check that SW is incompatible with pending SNW
  1218. --echo # Sending:
  1219. --send delete from t1 limit 1;
  1220. --echo #
  1221. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1222. connection mdl_con2;
  1223. --echo # Check that the above DELETE is blocked because of pending SNW lock.
  1224. let $wait_condition=
  1225. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1226. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1227. info = "delete from t1 limit 1";
  1228. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1229. --echo # Unblock ALTER TABLE.
  1230. commit;
  1231. --echo #
  1232. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1233. connection default;
  1234. --echo # Reaping ALTER.
  1235. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  1236. --reap
  1237. --echo #
  1238. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1239. connection mdl_con1;
  1240. --echo # Reaping DELETE.
  1241. --reap
  1242. --echo #
  1243. --echo # We can't do similar check for SNW, SNRW and X locks because
  1244. --echo # they will also be blocked by active SW lock.
  1245. --echo #
  1246. --echo #
  1247. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1248. connection mdl_con2;
  1249. --echo #
  1250. --echo # 2) Check compatibility for pending SNRW lock.
  1251. --echo #
  1252. --echo # Acquire SR lock in order to create pending SNRW lock.
  1253. begin;
  1254. select count(*) from t1;
  1255. --echo #
  1256. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1257. connection default;
  1258. --echo # Add pending SNRW lock.
  1259. --echo # Sending:
  1260. --send lock table t1 write;
  1261. --echo #
  1262. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1263. connection mdl_con1;
  1264. --echo # Check that LOCK TABLE is waiting with pending SNRW lock.
  1265. let $wait_condition=
  1266. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1267. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1268. info = "lock table t1 write";
  1269. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1270. --echo # Check that S and SH locks are compatible with pending SNRW
  1271. handler t1 open t;
  1272. handler t close;
  1273. select column_name from information_schema.columns where
  1274. table_schema='test' and table_name='t1';
  1275. --echo # Check that SR is incompatible with pending SNRW
  1276. --echo # Sending:
  1277. --send select count(*) from t1;
  1278. --echo #
  1279. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1280. connection mdl_con2;
  1281. --echo # Check that the above SELECT is blocked because of pending SNRW lock.
  1282. let $wait_condition=
  1283. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1284. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1285. info = "select count(*) from t1";
  1286. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1287. --echo # Unblock LOCK TABLE.
  1288. commit;
  1289. --echo #
  1290. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1291. connection default;
  1292. --echo # Reaping LOCK TABLE.
  1293. --reap
  1294. unlock tables;
  1295. --echo #
  1296. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1297. connection mdl_con1;
  1298. --echo # Reaping SELECT.
  1299. --reap
  1300. --echo # Restore pending SNRW lock.
  1301. --echo #
  1302. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1303. connection mdl_con2;
  1304. begin;
  1305. select count(*) from t1;
  1306. --echo #
  1307. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1308. connection default;
  1309. --echo # Sending:
  1310. --send lock table t1 write;
  1311. --echo #
  1312. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1313. connection mdl_con1;
  1314. --echo # Check that LOCK TABLE is waiting with pending SNRW lock.
  1315. let $wait_condition=
  1316. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1317. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1318. info = "lock table t1 write";
  1319. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1320. --echo # Check that SW is incompatible with pending SNRW
  1321. --echo # Sending:
  1322. --send insert into t1 values (1);
  1323. --echo #
  1324. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1325. connection mdl_con2;
  1326. --echo # Check that the above INSERT is blocked because of pending SNRW lock.
  1327. let $wait_condition=
  1328. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1329. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1330. info = "insert into t1 values (1)";
  1331. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1332. --echo # Unblock LOCK TABLE.
  1333. commit;
  1334. --echo #
  1335. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1336. connection default;
  1337. --echo # Reaping LOCK TABLE.
  1338. --reap
  1339. unlock tables;
  1340. --echo #
  1341. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1342. connection mdl_con1;
  1343. --echo # Reaping INSERT.
  1344. --reap
  1345. --echo # Restore pending SNRW lock.
  1346. --echo #
  1347. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1348. connection mdl_con2;
  1349. begin;
  1350. select count(*) from t1;
  1351. --echo #
  1352. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1353. connection default;
  1354. --echo # Sending:
  1355. --send lock table t1 write;
  1356. --echo #
  1357. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1358. connection mdl_con1;
  1359. --echo # Check that LOCK TABLE is waiting with pending SNRW lock.
  1360. let $wait_condition=
  1361. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1362. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1363. info = "lock table t1 write";
  1364. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1365. --echo # Check that SNW is compatible with pending SNRW
  1366. --echo # So ALTER TABLE statements are not starved by LOCK TABLEs.
  1367. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  1368. alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  1369. --echo #
  1370. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1371. connection mdl_con2;
  1372. --echo # Unblock LOCK TABLE.
  1373. commit;
  1374. --echo #
  1375. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1376. connection default;
  1377. --echo # Reaping LOCK TABLE.
  1378. --reap
  1379. unlock tables;
  1380. --echo #
  1381. --echo # We can't do similar check for SNRW and X locks because
  1382. --echo # they will also be blocked by active SR lock.
  1383. --echo #
  1384. --echo #
  1385. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1386. connection mdl_con2;
  1387. --echo #
  1388. --echo # 3) Check compatibility for pending X lock.
  1389. --echo #
  1390. --echo # Acquire SR lock in order to create pending X lock.
  1391. begin;
  1392. select count(*) from t1;
  1393. --echo #
  1394. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1395. connection default;
  1396. --echo # Add pending X lock.
  1397. --echo # Sending:
  1398. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  1399. --echo #
  1400. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1401. connection mdl_con1;
  1402. --echo # Check that RENAME TABLE is waiting with pending X lock.
  1403. let $wait_condition=
  1404. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1405. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1406. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  1407. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1408. --echo # Check that SH locks are compatible with pending X
  1409. select column_name from information_schema.columns where
  1410. table_schema='test' and table_name='t1';
  1411. --echo # Check that S is incompatible with pending X
  1412. --echo # Sending:
  1413. --send handler t1 open;
  1414. --echo #
  1415. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1416. connection mdl_con2;
  1417. --echo # Check that the above HANDLER OPEN is blocked because of pending X lock.
  1418. let $wait_condition=
  1419. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1420. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1421. info = "handler t1 open";
  1422. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1423. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE.
  1424. commit;
  1425. --echo #
  1426. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1427. connection default;
  1428. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE.
  1429. --error ER_TABLE_EXISTS_ERROR
  1430. --reap
  1431. --echo #
  1432. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1433. connection mdl_con1;
  1434. --echo # Reaping HANDLER t1 OPEN.
  1435. --reap
  1436. handler t1 close;
  1437. --echo # Restore pending X lock.
  1438. --echo #
  1439. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1440. connection mdl_con2;
  1441. begin;
  1442. select count(*) from t1;
  1443. --echo #
  1444. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1445. connection default;
  1446. --echo # Add pending X lock.
  1447. --echo # Sending:
  1448. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  1449. --echo #
  1450. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1451. connection mdl_con1;
  1452. --echo # Check that RENAME TABLE is waiting with pending X lock.
  1453. let $wait_condition=
  1454. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1455. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1456. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  1457. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1458. --echo # Check that SR is incompatible with pending X
  1459. --echo # Sending:
  1460. --send select count(*) from t1;
  1461. --echo #
  1462. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1463. connection mdl_con2;
  1464. --echo # Check that the above SELECT is blocked because of pending X lock.
  1465. let $wait_condition=
  1466. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1467. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1468. info = "select count(*) from t1";
  1469. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1470. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE.
  1471. commit;
  1472. --echo #
  1473. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1474. connection default;
  1475. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE.
  1476. --error ER_TABLE_EXISTS_ERROR
  1477. --reap
  1478. --echo #
  1479. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1480. connection mdl_con1;
  1481. --echo # Reaping SELECT.
  1482. --reap
  1483. --echo # Restore pending X lock.
  1484. --echo #
  1485. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1486. connection mdl_con2;
  1487. begin;
  1488. select count(*) from t1;
  1489. --echo #
  1490. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1491. connection default;
  1492. --echo # Add pending X lock.
  1493. --echo # Sending:
  1494. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  1495. --echo #
  1496. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1497. connection mdl_con1;
  1498. --echo # Check that RENAME TABLE is waiting with pending X lock.
  1499. let $wait_condition=
  1500. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1501. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1502. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  1503. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1504. --echo # Check that SW is incompatible with pending X
  1505. --echo # Sending:
  1506. --send delete from t1 limit 1;
  1507. --echo #
  1508. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1509. connection mdl_con2;
  1510. --echo # Check that the above DELETE is blocked because of pending X lock.
  1511. let $wait_condition=
  1512. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1513. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1514. info = "delete from t1 limit 1";
  1515. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1516. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE.
  1517. commit;
  1518. --echo #
  1519. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1520. connection default;
  1521. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE.
  1522. --error ER_TABLE_EXISTS_ERROR
  1523. --reap
  1524. --echo #
  1525. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1526. connection mdl_con1;
  1527. --echo # Reaping DELETE.
  1528. --reap
  1529. --echo # Restore pending X lock.
  1530. --echo #
  1531. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1532. connection mdl_con2;
  1533. begin;
  1534. select count(*) from t1;
  1535. --echo #
  1536. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1537. connection default;
  1538. --echo # Add pending X lock.
  1539. --echo # Sending:
  1540. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  1541. --echo #
  1542. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1543. connection mdl_con1;
  1544. --echo # Check that RENAME TABLE is waiting with pending X lock.
  1545. let $wait_condition=
  1546. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1547. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1548. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  1549. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1550. --echo # Check that SNW is incompatible with pending X
  1551. --echo # Sending:
  1552. --send alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  1553. --echo #
  1554. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1555. connection mdl_con2;
  1556. --echo # Check that the above ALTER TABLE is blocked because of pending X lock.
  1557. let $wait_condition=
  1558. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1559. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1560. info = "alter table t1 add primary key (c1)";
  1561. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1562. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE.
  1563. commit;
  1564. --echo #
  1565. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1566. connection default;
  1567. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE.
  1568. --error ER_TABLE_EXISTS_ERROR
  1569. --reap
  1570. --echo #
  1571. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1572. connection mdl_con1;
  1573. --echo # Reaping ALTER TABLE.
  1574. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  1575. --reap
  1576. --echo # Restore pending X lock.
  1577. --echo #
  1578. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1579. connection mdl_con2;
  1580. handler t1 open;
  1581. --echo #
  1582. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1583. connection default;
  1584. --echo # Add pending X lock.
  1585. --echo # Sending:
  1586. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  1587. --echo #
  1588. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1589. connection mdl_con1;
  1590. --echo # Check that RENAME TABLE is waiting with pending X lock.
  1591. let $wait_condition=
  1592. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1593. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1594. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  1595. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1596. --echo # Check that SNRW is incompatible with pending X
  1597. --echo # Sending:
  1598. --send lock table t1 write;
  1599. --echo #
  1600. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con3'.
  1601. connection mdl_con3;
  1602. --echo # Check that the above LOCK TABLES is blocked because of pending X lock.
  1603. let $wait_condition=
  1604. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1605. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1606. info = "lock table t1 write";
  1607. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1608. --echo #
  1609. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1610. connection mdl_con2;
  1611. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE.
  1612. handler t1 close;
  1613. --echo #
  1614. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1615. connection default;
  1616. --echo # Reaping RENAME TABLE.
  1617. --error ER_TABLE_EXISTS_ERROR
  1618. --reap
  1619. --echo #
  1620. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1621. connection mdl_con1;
  1622. --echo # Reaping LOCK TABLES.
  1623. --reap
  1624. unlock tables;
  1625. --echo #
  1626. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1627. connection default;
  1628. --echo #
  1629. --echo #
  1630. --echo # C) Now let us test how type-of-operation locks are handled in
  1631. --echo # transactional context. Obviously we are mostly interested
  1632. --echo # in conflicting types of locks.
  1633. --echo #
  1634. --echo #
  1635. --echo # 1) Let us check how various locks used within transactional
  1636. --echo # context interact with active/pending SNW lock.
  1637. --echo #
  1638. --echo # We start with case when we are acquiring lock on the table
  1639. --echo # which was not used in the transaction before.
  1640. begin;
  1641. select count(*) from t1;
  1642. --echo #
  1643. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1644. connection mdl_con1;
  1645. --echo # Create an active SNW lock on t2.
  1646. --echo # We have to use DEBUG_SYNC facility as otherwise SNW lock
  1647. --echo # will be immediately released (or upgraded to X lock).
  1648. insert into t2 values (1), (1);
  1649. set debug_sync= 'after_open_table_mdl_shared SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR finish';
  1650. --echo # Sending:
  1651. --send alter table t2 add primary key (c1);
  1652. --echo #
  1653. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1654. connection default;
  1655. set debug_sync= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  1656. --echo # SR lock should be acquired without any waiting.
  1657. select count(*) from t2;
  1658. commit;
  1659. --echo # Now let us check that we will wait in case of SW lock.
  1660. begin;
  1661. select count(*) from t1;
  1662. --echo # Sending:
  1663. --send insert into t2 values (1);
  1664. --echo #
  1665. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1666. connection mdl_con2;
  1667. --echo # Check that the above INSERT is blocked.
  1668. let $wait_condition=
  1669. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1670. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1671. info = "insert into t2 values (1)";
  1672. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1673. --echo # Unblock ALTER TABLE and thus INSERT.
  1674. set debug_sync= 'now SIGNAL finish';
  1675. --echo #
  1676. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1677. connection mdl_con1;
  1678. --echo # Reap ALTER TABLE.
  1679. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  1680. --reap
  1681. --echo #
  1682. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1683. connection default;
  1684. --echo # Reap INSERT.
  1685. --reap
  1686. commit;
  1687. --echo #
  1688. --echo # Now let us see what happens when we are acquiring lock on the table
  1689. --echo # which is already used in transaction.
  1690. --echo #
  1691. --echo # *) First, case when transaction which has SR lock on the table also
  1692. --echo # locked in SNW mode acquires yet another SR lock and then tries
  1693. --echo # to acquire SW lock.
  1694. begin;
  1695. select count(*) from t1;
  1696. --echo #
  1697. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1698. connection mdl_con1;
  1699. --echo # Create an active SNW lock on t1.
  1700. set debug_sync= 'after_open_table_mdl_shared SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR finish';
  1701. --echo # Sending:
  1702. --send alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  1703. --echo #
  1704. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1705. connection default;
  1706. set debug_sync= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  1707. --echo # We should still be able to get SR lock without waiting.
  1708. select count(*) from t1;
  1709. --echo # Since the above ALTER TABLE is not upgrading SNW lock to X by waiting
  1710. --echo # for SW lock we won't create deadlock.
  1711. --echo # So the below INSERT should not end-up with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error.
  1712. --echo # Sending:
  1713. --send insert into t1 values (1);
  1714. --echo #
  1715. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1716. connection mdl_con2;
  1717. --echo # Check that the above INSERT is blocked.
  1718. let $wait_condition=
  1719. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1720. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1721. info = "insert into t1 values (1)";
  1722. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1723. --echo # Unblock ALTER TABLE and thus INSERT.
  1724. set debug_sync= 'now SIGNAL finish';
  1725. --echo #
  1726. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1727. connection mdl_con1;
  1728. --echo # Reap ALTER TABLE.
  1729. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  1730. --reap
  1731. --echo #
  1732. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1733. connection default;
  1734. --echo # Reap INSERT.
  1735. --reap
  1736. commit;
  1737. --echo #
  1738. --echo # **) Now test in which transaction that has SW lock on the table
  1739. --echo # against which there is pending SNW lock acquires SR and SW
  1740. --echo # locks on this table.
  1741. --echo #
  1742. begin;
  1743. insert into t1 values (1);
  1744. --echo #
  1745. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1746. connection mdl_con1;
  1747. --echo # Create pending SNW lock on t1.
  1748. --echo # Sending:
  1749. --send alter table t1 add primary key (c1);
  1750. --echo #
  1751. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1752. connection default;
  1753. --echo # Wait until ALTER TABLE starts waiting for SNW lock.
  1754. let $wait_condition=
  1755. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1756. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1757. info = "alter table t1 add primary key (c1)";
  1758. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1759. --echo # We should still be able to get both SW and SR locks without waiting.
  1760. select count(*) from t1;
  1761. delete from t1 limit 1;
  1762. --echo # Unblock ALTER TABLE.
  1763. commit;
  1764. --echo #
  1765. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1766. connection mdl_con1;
  1767. --echo # Reap ALTER TABLE.
  1768. --error ER_DUP_ENTRY
  1769. --reap
  1770. --echo #
  1771. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1772. connection default;
  1773. --echo #
  1774. --echo # 2) Now similar tests for active SNW lock which is being upgraded
  1775. --echo # to X lock.
  1776. --echo #
  1777. --echo # Again we start with case when we are acquiring lock on the
  1778. --echo # table which was not used in the transaction before.
  1779. begin;
  1780. select count(*) from t1;
  1781. --echo #
  1782. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1783. connection mdl_con2;
  1784. --echo # Start transaction which will prevent SNW -> X upgrade from
  1785. --echo # completing immediately.
  1786. begin;
  1787. select count(*) from t2;
  1788. --echo #
  1789. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1790. connection mdl_con1;
  1791. --echo # Create SNW lock pending upgrade to X on t2.
  1792. --echo # Sending:
  1793. --send alter table t2 add column c2 int;
  1794. --echo #
  1795. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1796. connection default;
  1797. --echo # Wait until ALTER TABLE starts waiting X lock.
  1798. let $wait_condition=
  1799. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1800. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1801. info = "alter table t2 add column c2 int";
  1802. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1803. --echo # Check that attempt to acquire SR lock on t2 causes waiting.
  1804. --echo # Sending:
  1805. --send select count(*) from t2;
  1806. --echo #
  1807. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1808. connection mdl_con2;
  1809. --echo # Check that the above SELECT is blocked.
  1810. let $wait_condition=
  1811. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1812. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1813. info = "select count(*) from t2";
  1814. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1815. --echo # Unblock ALTER TABLE.
  1816. commit;
  1817. --echo #
  1818. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1819. connection mdl_con1;
  1820. --echo # Reap ALTER TABLE.
  1821. --reap
  1822. --echo #
  1823. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1824. connection default;
  1825. --echo # Reap SELECT.
  1826. --reap
  1827. commit;
  1828. --echo # Do similar check for SW lock.
  1829. begin;
  1830. select count(*) from t1;
  1831. --echo #
  1832. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1833. connection mdl_con2;
  1834. --echo # Start transaction which will prevent SNW -> X upgrade from
  1835. --echo # completing immediately.
  1836. begin;
  1837. select count(*) from t2;
  1838. --echo #
  1839. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1840. connection mdl_con1;
  1841. --echo # Create SNW lock pending upgrade to X on t2.
  1842. --echo # Sending:
  1843. --send alter table t2 drop column c2;
  1844. --echo #
  1845. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1846. connection default;
  1847. --echo # Wait until ALTER TABLE starts waiting X lock.
  1848. let $wait_condition=
  1849. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1850. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1851. info = "alter table t2 drop column c2";
  1852. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1853. --echo # Check that attempt to acquire SW lock on t2 causes waiting.
  1854. --echo # Sending:
  1855. --send insert into t2 values (1);
  1856. --echo #
  1857. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  1858. connection mdl_con2;
  1859. --echo # Check that the above INSERT is blocked.
  1860. let $wait_condition=
  1861. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1862. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1863. info = "insert into t2 values (1)";
  1864. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1865. --echo # Unblock ALTER TABLE.
  1866. commit;
  1867. --echo #
  1868. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1869. connection mdl_con1;
  1870. --echo # Reap ALTER TABLE.
  1871. --reap
  1872. --echo #
  1873. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1874. connection default;
  1875. --echo # Reap INSERT.
  1876. --reap
  1877. commit;
  1878. --echo #
  1879. --echo # Test for the case in which we are acquiring lock on the table
  1880. --echo # which is already used in transaction.
  1881. --echo #
  1882. begin;
  1883. select count(*) from t1;
  1884. --echo #
  1885. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1886. connection mdl_con1;
  1887. --echo # Create SNW lock pending upgrade to X.
  1888. --echo # Sending:
  1889. --send alter table t1 add column c2 int;
  1890. --echo #
  1891. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1892. connection default;
  1893. --echo # Wait until ALTER TABLE starts waiting X lock.
  1894. let $wait_condition=
  1895. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1896. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1897. info = "alter table t1 add column c2 int";
  1898. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1899. --echo # Check that transaction is still able to acquire SR lock.
  1900. select count(*) from t1;
  1901. --echo # Waiting trying to acquire SW lock will cause deadlock and
  1902. --echo # therefore should cause an error.
  1903. --error ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK
  1904. delete from t1 limit 1;
  1905. --echo # Unblock ALTER TABLE.
  1906. commit;
  1907. --echo #
  1908. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1909. connection mdl_con1;
  1910. --echo # Reap ALTER TABLE.
  1911. --reap
  1912. --echo #
  1913. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1914. connection default;
  1915. --echo #
  1916. --echo # 3) Check how various locks used within transactional context
  1917. --echo # interact with active/pending SNRW lock.
  1918. --echo #
  1919. --echo # Once again we start with case when we are acquiring lock on
  1920. --echo # the table which was not used in the transaction before.
  1921. begin;
  1922. select count(*) from t1;
  1923. --echo #
  1924. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1925. connection mdl_con1;
  1926. lock table t2 write;
  1927. --echo #
  1928. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1929. connection default;
  1930. --echo # Attempt to acquire SR should be blocked. It should
  1931. --echo # not cause errors as it does not creates deadlock.
  1932. --echo # Sending:
  1933. --send select count(*) from t2;
  1934. --echo #
  1935. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1936. connection mdl_con1;
  1937. --echo # Check that the above SELECT is blocked
  1938. let $wait_condition=
  1939. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1940. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1941. info = "select count(*) from t2";
  1942. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1943. --echo # Unblock SELECT.
  1944. unlock tables;
  1945. --echo #
  1946. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1947. connection default;
  1948. --echo # Reap SELECT.
  1949. --reap
  1950. commit;
  1951. --echo # Repeat the same test for SW lock.
  1952. begin;
  1953. select count(*) from t1;
  1954. --echo #
  1955. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1956. connection mdl_con1;
  1957. lock table t2 write;
  1958. --echo #
  1959. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1960. connection default;
  1961. --echo # Again attempt to acquire SW should be blocked and should
  1962. --echo # not cause any errors.
  1963. --echo # Sending:
  1964. --send delete from t2 limit 1;
  1965. --echo #
  1966. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1967. connection mdl_con1;
  1968. --echo # Check that the above DELETE is blocked
  1969. let $wait_condition=
  1970. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  1971. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  1972. info = "delete from t2 limit 1";
  1973. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  1974. --echo # Unblock DELETE.
  1975. unlock tables;
  1976. --echo #
  1977. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1978. connection default;
  1979. --echo # Reap DELETE.
  1980. --reap
  1981. commit;
  1982. --echo #
  1983. --echo # Now coverage for the case in which we are acquiring lock on
  1984. --echo # the table which is already used in transaction and against
  1985. --echo # which there is a pending SNRW lock request.
  1986. --echo #
  1987. --echo # *) Let us start with case when transaction has only a SR lock.
  1988. --echo #
  1989. begin;
  1990. select count(*) from t1;
  1991. --echo #
  1992. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  1993. connection mdl_con1;
  1994. --echo # Sending:
  1995. --send lock table t1 write;
  1996. --echo #
  1997. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  1998. connection default;
  1999. --echo # Wait until LOCK TABLE is blocked creating pending request for X lock.
  2000. let $wait_condition=
  2001. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2002. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2003. info = "lock table t1 write";
  2004. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2005. --echo # Check that another instance of SR lock is granted without waiting.
  2006. select count(*) from t1;
  2007. --echo # Attempt to wait for SW lock will lead to deadlock, thus
  2008. --echo # the below statement should end with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error.
  2009. --error ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK
  2010. delete from t1 limit 1;
  2011. --echo # Unblock LOCK TABLES.
  2012. commit;
  2013. --echo #
  2014. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  2015. connection mdl_con1;
  2016. --echo # Reap LOCK TABLES.
  2017. --reap
  2018. unlock tables;
  2019. --echo #
  2020. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2021. connection default;
  2022. --echo #
  2023. --echo # **) Now case when transaction has a SW lock.
  2024. --echo #
  2025. begin;
  2026. delete from t1 limit 1;
  2027. --echo #
  2028. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  2029. connection mdl_con1;
  2030. --echo # Sending:
  2031. --send lock table t1 write;
  2032. --echo #
  2033. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2034. connection default;
  2035. --echo # Wait until LOCK TABLE is blocked creating pending request for X lock.
  2036. let $wait_condition=
  2037. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2038. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2039. info = "lock table t1 write";
  2040. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2041. --echo # Check that both SR and SW locks are granted without waiting
  2042. --echo # and errors.
  2043. select count(*) from t1;
  2044. insert into t1 values (1, 1);
  2045. --echo # Unblock LOCK TABLES.
  2046. commit;
  2047. --echo #
  2048. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  2049. connection mdl_con1;
  2050. --echo # Reap LOCK TABLES.
  2051. --reap
  2052. unlock tables;
  2053. --echo #
  2054. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2055. connection default;
  2056. --echo #
  2057. --echo # 4) Check how various locks used within transactional context
  2058. --echo # interact with active/pending X lock.
  2059. --echo #
  2060. --echo # As usual we start with case when we are acquiring lock on
  2061. --echo # the table which was not used in the transaction before.
  2062. begin;
  2063. select count(*) from t1;
  2064. --echo #
  2065. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  2066. connection mdl_con2;
  2067. --echo # Start transaction which will prevent X lock from going away
  2068. --echo # immediately.
  2069. begin;
  2070. select count(*) from t2;
  2071. --echo #
  2072. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  2073. connection mdl_con1;
  2074. --echo # Create pending X lock on t2.
  2075. --echo # Sending:
  2076. --send rename table t2 to t3;
  2077. --echo #
  2078. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2079. connection default;
  2080. --echo # Wait until RENAME TABLE starts waiting with pending X lock.
  2081. let $wait_condition=
  2082. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2083. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2084. info = "rename table t2 to t3";
  2085. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2086. --echo # Check that attempt to acquire SR lock on t2 causes waiting.
  2087. --echo # Sending:
  2088. --send select count(*) from t2;
  2089. --echo #
  2090. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  2091. connection mdl_con2;
  2092. --echo # Check that the above SELECT is blocked.
  2093. let $wait_condition=
  2094. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2095. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2096. info = "select count(*) from t2";
  2097. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2098. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE.
  2099. commit;
  2100. --echo #
  2101. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  2102. connection mdl_con1;
  2103. --echo # Reap RENAME TABLE.
  2104. --reap
  2105. --echo #
  2106. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2107. connection default;
  2108. --echo # Reap SELECT.
  2109. --error ER_NO_SUCH_TABLE
  2110. --reap
  2111. commit;
  2112. rename table t3 to t2;
  2113. --echo # The same test for SW lock.
  2114. begin;
  2115. select count(*) from t1;
  2116. --echo #
  2117. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  2118. connection mdl_con2;
  2119. --echo # Start transaction which will prevent X lock from going away
  2120. --echo # immediately.
  2121. begin;
  2122. select count(*) from t2;
  2123. --echo #
  2124. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  2125. connection mdl_con1;
  2126. --echo # Create pending X lock on t2.
  2127. --echo # Sending:
  2128. --send rename table t2 to t3;
  2129. --echo #
  2130. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2131. connection default;
  2132. --echo # Wait until RENAME TABLE starts waiting with pending X lock.
  2133. let $wait_condition=
  2134. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2135. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2136. info = "rename table t2 to t3";
  2137. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2138. --echo # Check that attempt to acquire SW lock on t2 causes waiting.
  2139. --echo # Sending:
  2140. --send delete from t2 limit 1;
  2141. --echo #
  2142. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con2'.
  2143. connection mdl_con2;
  2144. --echo # Check that the above DELETE is blocked.
  2145. let $wait_condition=
  2146. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2147. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2148. info = "delete from t2 limit 1";
  2149. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2150. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE.
  2151. commit;
  2152. --echo #
  2153. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  2154. connection mdl_con1;
  2155. --echo # Reap RENAME TABLE.
  2156. --reap
  2157. --echo #
  2158. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2159. connection default;
  2160. --echo # Reap DELETE.
  2161. --error ER_NO_SUCH_TABLE
  2162. --reap
  2163. commit;
  2164. rename table t3 to t2;
  2165. --echo #
  2166. --echo # Coverage for the case in which we are acquiring lock on
  2167. --echo # the table which is already used in transaction and against
  2168. --echo # which there is a pending X lock request.
  2169. --echo #
  2170. --echo # *) The first case is when transaction has only a SR lock.
  2171. --echo #
  2172. begin;
  2173. select count(*) from t1;
  2174. --echo #
  2175. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  2176. connection mdl_con1;
  2177. --echo # Sending:
  2178. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  2179. --echo #
  2180. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2181. connection default;
  2182. --echo # Wait until RENAME TABLE is blocked creating pending request for X lock.
  2183. let $wait_condition=
  2184. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2185. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2186. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  2187. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2188. --echo # Check that another instance of SR lock is granted without waiting.
  2189. select count(*) from t1;
  2190. --echo # Attempt to wait for SW lock will lead to deadlock, thus
  2191. --echo # the below statement should end with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error.
  2192. --error ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK
  2193. delete from t1 limit 1;
  2194. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE.
  2195. commit;
  2196. --echo #
  2197. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  2198. connection mdl_con1;
  2199. --echo # Reap RENAME TABLE.
  2200. --error ER_TABLE_EXISTS_ERROR
  2201. --reap
  2202. --echo #
  2203. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2204. connection default;
  2205. --echo #
  2206. --echo # **) The second case is when transaction has a SW lock.
  2207. --echo #
  2208. begin;
  2209. delete from t1 limit 1;
  2210. --echo #
  2211. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  2212. connection mdl_con1;
  2213. --echo # Sending:
  2214. --send rename table t1 to t2;
  2215. --echo #
  2216. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2217. connection default;
  2218. --echo # Wait until RENAME TABLE is blocked creating pending request for X lock.
  2219. let $wait_condition=
  2220. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2221. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2222. info = "rename table t1 to t2";
  2223. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2224. --echo # Check that both SR and SW locks are granted without waiting
  2225. --echo # and errors.
  2226. select count(*) from t1;
  2227. insert into t1 values (1, 1);
  2228. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE.
  2229. commit;
  2230. --echo #
  2231. --echo # Switching to connection 'mdl_con1'.
  2232. connection mdl_con1;
  2233. --echo # Reap RENAME TABLE.
  2234. --error ER_TABLE_EXISTS_ERROR
  2235. --reap
  2236. --echo #
  2237. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2238. connection default;
  2239. --echo # Clean-up.
  2240. disconnect mdl_con1;
  2241. disconnect mdl_con2;
  2242. disconnect mdl_con3;
  2243. set debug_sync= 'RESET';
  2244. drop table t1, t2;
  2245. --echo #
  2246. --echo # Additional coverage for some scenarios in which not quite
  2247. --echo # correct use of S metadata locks by HANDLER statement might
  2248. --echo # have caused deadlocks.
  2249. --echo #
  2250. --disable_warnings
  2251. drop table if exists t1, t2;
  2252. --enable_warnings
  2253. connect(handler_con1,localhost,root,,);
  2254. connect(handler_con2,localhost,root,,);
  2255. connection default;
  2256. create table t1 (i int);
  2257. create table t2 (j int);
  2258. insert into t1 values (1);
  2259. --echo #
  2260. --echo # First, check scenario in which we upgrade SNRW lock to X lock
  2261. --echo # on a table while having HANDLER READ trying to acquire TL_READ
  2262. --echo # on the same table.
  2263. --echo #
  2264. handler t1 open;
  2265. --echo #
  2266. --echo # Switching to connection 'handler_con1'.
  2267. connection handler_con1;
  2268. lock table t1 write;
  2269. --echo # Upgrade SNRW to X lock.
  2270. --echo # Sending:
  2271. --send alter table t1 add column j int;
  2272. --echo #
  2273. --echo # Switching to connection 'handler_con2'.
  2274. connection handler_con2;
  2275. --echo # Wait until ALTER is blocked during upgrade.
  2276. let $wait_condition=
  2277. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2278. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2279. info = "alter table t1 add column j int";
  2280. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2281. --echo #
  2282. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2283. connection default;
  2284. --echo # The below statement should not cause deadlock.
  2285. --send handler t1 read first;
  2286. --echo #
  2287. --echo # Switching to connection 'handler_con1'.
  2288. connection handler_con1;
  2289. --echo # Reap ALTER TABLE.
  2290. --reap
  2291. unlock tables;
  2292. --echo #
  2293. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2294. connection default;
  2295. --echo # Reap HANDLER READ.
  2296. --reap
  2297. handler t1 close;
  2298. --echo #
  2299. --echo # Now, check scenario in which upgrade of SNRW lock to X lock
  2300. --echo # can be blocked by HANDLER which is open in connection currently
  2301. --echo # waiting to get table-lock owned by connection doing upgrade.
  2302. --echo #
  2303. handler t1 open;
  2304. --echo #
  2305. --echo # Switching to connection 'handler_con1'.
  2306. connection handler_con1;
  2307. lock table t1 write, t2 read;
  2308. --echo #
  2309. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2310. connection default;
  2311. --echo # Execute statement which will be blocked on table-level lock
  2312. --echo # owned by connection 'handler_con1'.
  2313. --echo # Sending:
  2314. --send insert into t2 values (1);
  2315. --echo #
  2316. --echo # Switching to connection 'handler_con1'.
  2317. connection handler_con1;
  2318. --echo # Wait until INSERT is blocked on table-level lock.
  2319. let $wait_condition=
  2320. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2321. where state = "Waiting for table level lock" and
  2322. info = "insert into t2 values (1)";
  2323. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2324. --echo # Sending 'alter table t1 drop column j'. It should not cause
  2325. --echo # deadlock.
  2326. send alter table t1 drop column j;
  2327. --echo # Switching to connection 'handler_con2'.
  2328. connection handler_con2;
  2329. --echo # Wait until ALTER is blocked during upgrade.
  2330. let $wait_condition=
  2331. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2332. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2333. info = "alter table t1 drop column j";
  2334. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2335. --echo #
  2336. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2337. connection default;
  2338. --echo # Reap INSERT.
  2339. --error ER_LOCK_ABORTED
  2340. --reap
  2341. handler t1 close;
  2342. --echo #
  2343. --echo # Switching to connection 'handler_con1'.
  2344. connection handler_con1;
  2345. --echo # Reaping 'alter table t1 drop column j'
  2346. --reap
  2347. unlock tables;
  2348. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2349. connection default;
  2350. --echo # Then, check the scenario in which upgrade of SNRW lock to X
  2351. --echo # lock is blocked by HANDLER which is open in connection currently
  2352. --echo # waiting to get SW lock on the same table.
  2353. --echo #
  2354. handler t1 open;
  2355. --echo #
  2356. --echo # Switching to connection 'handler_con1'.
  2357. connection handler_con1;
  2358. lock table t1 write;
  2359. --echo #
  2360. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2361. connection default;
  2362. --echo # The below insert should be blocked because active SNRW lock on 't1'.
  2363. --echo # Sending:
  2364. --send insert into t1 values (1);
  2365. --echo #
  2366. --echo # Switching to connection 'handler_con1'.
  2367. connection handler_con1;
  2368. --echo # Wait until INSERT is blocked because of SNRW lock.
  2369. let $wait_condition=
  2370. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2371. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2372. info = "insert into t1 values (1)";
  2373. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2374. --echo # The below ALTER TABLE will be blocked because of presence of HANDLER.
  2375. --echo # Sending:
  2376. --send alter table t1 add column j int;
  2377. --echo #
  2378. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2379. connection default;
  2380. --echo # INSERT should be chosen as victim for resolving deadlock.
  2381. --echo # Reaping INSERT.
  2382. --error ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK
  2383. --reap
  2384. --echo # Close HANDLER to unblock ALTER TABLE.
  2385. handler t1 close;
  2386. --echo #
  2387. --echo # Switching to connection 'handler_con1'.
  2388. connection handler_con1;
  2389. --echo # Reaping ALTER TABLE.
  2390. --reap
  2391. unlock tables;
  2392. --echo #
  2393. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2394. connection default;
  2395. --echo #
  2396. --echo # Finally, test in which upgrade of SNRW lock to X lock is blocked
  2397. --echo # by HANDLER which is open in connection currently waiting to get
  2398. --echo # SR lock on the table on which lock is upgraded.
  2399. --echo #
  2400. handler t1 open;
  2401. --echo #
  2402. --echo # Switching to connection 'handler_con1'.
  2403. connection handler_con1;
  2404. lock table t1 write, t2 write;
  2405. --echo #
  2406. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2407. connection default;
  2408. --echo # The below insert should be blocked because active SNRW lock on 't1'.
  2409. --echo # Sending:
  2410. --send insert into t2 values (1);
  2411. --echo #
  2412. --echo # Switching to connection 'handler_con1'.
  2413. connection handler_con1;
  2414. --echo # Wait until INSERT is blocked because of SNRW lock.
  2415. let $wait_condition=
  2416. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2417. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2418. info = "insert into t2 values (1)";
  2419. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2420. --echo # The below ALTER TABLE will be blocked because of presence of HANDLER.
  2421. --echo # Sending:
  2422. --send alter table t1 drop column j;
  2423. --echo #
  2424. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2425. connection default;
  2426. --echo # INSERT should be chosen as victim for resolving deadlock.
  2427. --echo # Reaping INSERT.
  2428. --error ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK
  2429. --reap
  2430. --echo # Close HANDLER to unblock ALTER TABLE.
  2431. handler t1 close;
  2432. --echo #
  2433. --echo # Switching to connection 'handler_con1'.
  2434. connection handler_con1;
  2435. --echo # Reaping ALTER TABLE.
  2436. --reap
  2437. unlock tables;
  2438. --echo #
  2439. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2440. connection default;
  2441. --echo # Clean-up.
  2442. disconnect handler_con1;
  2443. disconnect handler_con2;
  2444. drop tables t1, t2;
  2445. --echo #
  2446. --echo # Test coverage for basic deadlock detection in metadata
  2447. --echo # locking subsystem.
  2448. --echo #
  2449. --disable_warnings
  2450. drop tables if exists t0, t1, t2, t3, t4, t5;
  2451. --enable_warnings
  2452. set debug_sync= 'RESET';
  2453. connect(deadlock_con1,localhost,root,,);
  2454. connect(deadlock_con2,localhost,root,,);
  2455. connect(deadlock_con3,localhost,root,,);
  2456. connection default;
  2457. create table t1 (i int);
  2458. create table t2 (j int);
  2459. create table t3 (k int);
  2460. create table t4 (k int);
  2461. --echo #
  2462. --echo # Test for the case in which no deadlock occurs.
  2463. --echo #
  2464. --echo #
  2465. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2466. connection deadlock_con1;
  2467. begin;
  2468. insert into t1 values (1);
  2469. --echo #
  2470. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con2'.
  2471. connection deadlock_con2;
  2472. begin;
  2473. insert into t2 values (1);
  2474. --echo #
  2475. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2476. connection default;
  2477. --echo # Send:
  2478. --send rename table t2 to t0, t3 to t2, t0 to t3;
  2479. --echo #
  2480. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2481. connection deadlock_con1;
  2482. --echo # Wait until the above RENAME TABLE is blocked because it has to wait
  2483. --echo # for 'deadlock_con2' which holds shared metadata lock on 't2'.
  2484. let $wait_condition=
  2485. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2486. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2487. info = "rename table t2 to t0, t3 to t2, t0 to t3";
  2488. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2489. --echo # The below statement should wait for exclusive metadata lock
  2490. --echo # on 't2' to go away and should not produce ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK
  2491. --echo # as no deadlock is possible in this situation.
  2492. --echo # Send:
  2493. --send select * from t2;
  2494. --echo #
  2495. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con2'.
  2496. connection deadlock_con2;
  2497. --echo # Wait until the above SELECT * FROM t2 is starts waiting
  2498. --echo # for an exclusive metadata lock to go away.
  2499. let $wait_condition=
  2500. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2501. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2502. info = "select * from t2";
  2503. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2504. --echo #
  2505. --echo # Unblock RENAME TABLE by releasing shared metadata lock on t2.
  2506. commit;
  2507. --echo #
  2508. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2509. connection default;
  2510. --echo # Reap RENAME TABLE.
  2511. --reap
  2512. --echo #
  2513. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2514. connection deadlock_con1;
  2515. --echo # Reap SELECT.
  2516. --reap
  2517. --echo #
  2518. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2519. connection default;
  2520. --echo #
  2521. --echo # Let us check that in the process of waiting for conflicting lock
  2522. --echo # on table 't2' to go away transaction in connection 'deadlock_con1'
  2523. --echo # has not released metadata lock on table 't1'.
  2524. --echo # Send:
  2525. --send rename table t1 to t0, t3 to t1, t0 to t3;
  2526. --echo #
  2527. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2528. connection deadlock_con1;
  2529. --echo # Wait until the above RENAME TABLE is blocked because it has to wait
  2530. --echo # for 'deadlock_con1' which should still hold shared metadata lock on
  2531. --echo # table 't1'.
  2532. let $wait_condition=
  2533. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2534. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2535. info = "rename table t1 to t0, t3 to t1, t0 to t3";
  2536. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2537. --echo # Commit transaction to unblock RENAME TABLE.
  2538. commit;
  2539. --echo #
  2540. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2541. connection default;
  2542. --echo # Reap RENAME TABLE.
  2543. --reap
  2544. --echo #
  2545. --echo # Test for case when deadlock occurs and should be detected immediately.
  2546. --echo #
  2547. --echo #
  2548. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2549. connection deadlock_con1;
  2550. begin;
  2551. insert into t2 values (2);
  2552. --echo #
  2553. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2554. connection default;
  2555. --echo # Send:
  2556. --send rename table t2 to t0, t1 to t2, t0 to t1;
  2557. --echo #
  2558. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2559. connection deadlock_con1;
  2560. --echo # Wait until the above RENAME TABLE is blocked because it has to wait
  2561. --echo # for 'deadlock_con1' which holds shared metadata lock on 't2'.
  2562. let $wait_condition=
  2563. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2564. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2565. info = "rename table t2 to t0, t1 to t2, t0 to t1";
  2566. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2567. --echo #
  2568. --echo # The below statement should not wait as doing so will cause deadlock.
  2569. --echo # Instead it should fail and emit ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK statement.
  2570. --error ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK
  2571. select * from t1;
  2572. --echo #
  2573. --echo # Let us check that failure of the above statement has not released
  2574. --echo # metadata lock on table 't1', i.e. that RENAME TABLE is still blocked.
  2575. let $wait_condition=
  2576. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2577. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2578. info = "rename table t2 to t0, t1 to t2, t0 to t1";
  2579. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2580. --echo # Commit transaction to unblock RENAME TABLE.
  2581. commit;
  2582. --echo #
  2583. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2584. connection default;
  2585. --echo # Reap RENAME TABLE.
  2586. --reap
  2587. --echo #
  2588. --echo # Test for the case in which deadlock also occurs but not immediately.
  2589. --echo #
  2590. --echo #
  2591. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2592. connection deadlock_con1;
  2593. begin;
  2594. insert into t2 values (1);
  2595. --echo #
  2596. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2597. connection default;
  2598. lock table t1 write;
  2599. --echo #
  2600. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2601. connection deadlock_con1;
  2602. --echo # The below SELECT statement should wait for metadata lock
  2603. --echo # on table 't1' and should not produce ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK
  2604. --echo # immediately as no deadlock is possible at the moment.
  2605. --send select * from t1;
  2606. --echo #
  2607. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con2'.
  2608. connection deadlock_con2;
  2609. --echo # Wait until the above SELECT * FROM t1 is starts waiting
  2610. --echo # for an UNRW metadata lock to go away.
  2611. let $wait_condition=
  2612. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2613. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and info = "select * from t1";
  2614. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2615. --echo # Send RENAME TABLE statement that will deadlock with the
  2616. --echo # SELECT statement and thus should abort the latter.
  2617. --send rename table t1 to t0, t2 to t1, t0 to t2;
  2618. --echo #
  2619. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2620. connection default;
  2621. --echo # Wait till above RENAME TABLE is blocked while holding
  2622. --echo # pending X lock on t1.
  2623. let $wait_condition=
  2624. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2625. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2626. info = "rename table t1 to t0, t2 to t1, t0 to t2";
  2627. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2628. --echo # Allow the above RENAME TABLE to acquire lock on t1 and
  2629. --echo # create pending lock on t2 thus creating deadlock.
  2630. unlock tables;
  2631. --echo #
  2632. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2633. connection deadlock_con1;
  2634. --echo # Since the latest RENAME TABLE entered in deadlock with SELECT
  2635. --echo # statement the latter should be aborted and emit ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK
  2636. --echo # error.
  2637. --echo # Reap SELECT * FROM t1.
  2638. --error ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK
  2639. --reap
  2640. --echo #
  2641. --echo # Again let us check that failure of the SELECT statement has not
  2642. --echo # released metadata lock on table 't2', i.e. that the latest RENAME
  2643. --echo # is blocked.
  2644. let $wait_condition=
  2645. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2646. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2647. info = "rename table t1 to t0, t2 to t1, t0 to t2";
  2648. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2649. --echo # Commit transaction to unblock this RENAME TABLE.
  2650. commit;
  2651. --echo #
  2652. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con2'.
  2653. connection deadlock_con2;
  2654. --echo # Reap RENAME TABLE ... .
  2655. --reap;
  2656. --echo #
  2657. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2658. connection default;
  2659. drop tables t1, t2, t3, t4;
  2660. --echo #
  2661. --echo # Now, test case which shows that deadlock detection empiric
  2662. --echo # also takes into account requests for metadata lock upgrade.
  2663. --echo #
  2664. create table t1 (i int);
  2665. insert into t1 values (1);
  2666. --echo # Avoid race which occurs when SELECT in 'deadlock_con1' connection
  2667. --echo # accesses table before the above INSERT unlocks the table and thus
  2668. --echo # its result becomes visible to other connections.
  2669. select * from t1;
  2670. --echo #
  2671. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2672. connection deadlock_con1;
  2673. begin;
  2674. select * from t1;
  2675. --echo #
  2676. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2677. connection default;
  2678. --echo # Send:
  2679. --send alter table t1 add column j int, rename to t2;
  2680. --echo #
  2681. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2682. connection deadlock_con1;
  2683. --echo # Wait until the above ALTER TABLE ... RENAME acquires exclusive
  2684. --echo # metadata lock on 't2' and starts waiting for connection
  2685. --echo # 'deadlock_con1' which holds shared lock on 't1'.
  2686. let $wait_condition=
  2687. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2688. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2689. info = "alter table t1 add column j int, rename to t2";
  2690. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2691. --echo # The below statement should not wait as it will cause deadlock.
  2692. --echo # An appropriate error should be reported instead.
  2693. --error ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK
  2694. select * from t2;
  2695. --echo # Again let us check that failure of the above statement has not
  2696. --echo # released all metadata locks in connection 'deadlock_con1' and
  2697. --echo # so ALTER TABLE ... RENAME is still blocked.
  2698. let $wait_condition=
  2699. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2700. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2701. info = "alter table t1 add column j int, rename to t2";
  2702. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2703. --echo # Commit transaction to unblock ALTER TABLE ... RENAME.
  2704. commit;
  2705. --echo #
  2706. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2707. connection default;
  2708. --echo # Reap ALTER TABLE ... RENAME.
  2709. --reap
  2710. drop table t2;
  2711. --echo #
  2712. --echo # Test that in situation when MDL subsystem detects a deadlock
  2713. --echo # but it turns out that it can be resolved by backing-off locks
  2714. --echo # acquired by one of participating transactions (which is
  2715. --echo # possible when one of transactions consists only of currently
  2716. --echo # executed statement, e.g. in autocommit mode) no error is
  2717. --echo # reported.
  2718. --echo #
  2719. create table t1 (i int);
  2720. create table t2 (j int);
  2721. --echo # Ensure that the below SELECT stops once it has acquired metadata
  2722. --echo # lock on table 't2'.
  2723. set debug_sync= 'after_open_table_mdl_shared SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR finish';
  2724. --echo # Sending:
  2725. --send select * from t2, t1
  2726. --echo #
  2727. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2728. connection deadlock_con1;
  2729. --echo # Wait till SELECT acquires MDL on 't2' and starts waiting for signal.
  2730. set debug_sync= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  2731. --echo # Sending:
  2732. --send lock tables t1 write, t2 write
  2733. --echo #
  2734. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con2'.
  2735. connection deadlock_con2;
  2736. --echo # Wait until LOCK TABLES acquires SNRW lock on 't1' and is blocked
  2737. --echo # while trying to acquire SNRW lock on 't1'.
  2738. let $wait_condition=
  2739. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2740. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2741. info = "lock tables t1 write, t2 write";
  2742. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2743. --echo # Resume SELECT execution, this should eventually unblock LOCK TABLES.
  2744. set debug_sync= 'now SIGNAL finish';
  2745. --echo #
  2746. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2747. connection deadlock_con1;
  2748. --echo # Reaping LOCK TABLES.
  2749. --reap
  2750. unlock tables;
  2751. --echo #
  2752. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2753. connection default;
  2754. --echo # Reaping SELECT. It succeed and not report ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error.
  2755. --reap
  2756. drop tables t1, t2;
  2757. --echo #
  2758. --echo # Test coverage for situation in which a race has happened
  2759. --echo # during deadlock detection process which led to unwarranted
  2760. --echo # ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error.
  2761. --echo #
  2762. create table t1 (i int);
  2763. --echo # Ensure that ALTER waits once it has acquired SNW lock.
  2764. set debug_sync='after_open_table_mdl_shared SIGNAL parked1 WAIT_FOR go1';
  2765. --echo # Sending:
  2766. --send alter table t1 add column j int
  2767. --echo #
  2768. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2769. connection deadlock_con1;
  2770. --echo # Wait till ALTER acquires SNW lock and stops.
  2771. set debug_sync='now WAIT_FOR parked1';
  2772. --echo # Ensure that INSERT is paused once it detects that there is
  2773. --echo # a conflicting metadata lock so it has to wait, but before
  2774. --echo # deadlock detection is run.
  2775. set debug_sync='mdl_acquire_lock_wait SIGNAL parked2 WAIT_FOR go2';
  2776. --echo # Sending:
  2777. --send insert into t1 values ()
  2778. --echo #
  2779. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con2'.
  2780. connection deadlock_con2;
  2781. --echo # Wait till INSERT is paused.
  2782. set debug_sync='now WAIT_FOR parked2';
  2783. --echo # Resume ALTER execution. Eventually it will release its
  2784. --echo # metadata lock and INSERT's request for SW lock will be
  2785. --echo # satisified.
  2786. set debug_sync='now SIGNAL go1';
  2787. --echo #
  2788. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2789. connection default;
  2790. --echo # Reaping ALTER TABLE.
  2791. --reap
  2792. --echo # Add a new request for SNW lock to waiting graph.
  2793. --echo # Sending:
  2794. --send alter table t1 drop column j
  2795. --echo #
  2796. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con2'.
  2797. connection deadlock_con2;
  2798. --echo # Wait until ALTER is blocked.
  2799. let $wait_condition=
  2800. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2801. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2802. info = "alter table t1 drop column j";
  2803. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2804. --echo # Resume INSERT so it can start deadlock detection.
  2805. --echo #
  2806. --echo # At this point there is a discrepancy between the fact that INSERT's
  2807. --echo # SW lock is already satisfied, but INSERT's connection is still
  2808. --echo # marked as waiting for it. Looking for a loop in waiters graph
  2809. --echo # without additional checks has detected a deadlock (INSERT waits
  2810. --echo # for SW lock; which is not granted because of pending SNW lock from
  2811. --echo # ALTER; which waits for active SW lock from INSERT). Since requests
  2812. --echo # for SW and SNW locks have same weight ALTER was selected as a victim
  2813. --echo # and ended with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error.
  2814. set debug_sync='now SIGNAL go2';
  2815. --echo #
  2816. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2817. connection deadlock_con1;
  2818. --echo # Reaping INSERT.
  2819. --reap
  2820. --echo #
  2821. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2822. connection default;
  2823. --echo # Reaping ALTER. It should succeed and not produce ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK.
  2824. --reap
  2825. drop table t1;
  2826. --echo #
  2827. --echo # Now, test for a situation in which deadlock involves waiting not
  2828. --echo # only in MDL subsystem but also for TDC. Such deadlocks should be
  2829. --echo # successfully detected. If possible, they should be resolved without
  2830. --echo # resorting to ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error.
  2831. --echo #
  2832. create table t1(i int);
  2833. create table t2(j int);
  2834. --echo #
  2835. --echo # First, let us check how we handle a simple scenario involving
  2836. --echo # waits in MDL and TDC.
  2837. --echo #
  2838. set debug_sync= 'RESET';
  2839. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2840. connection deadlock_con1;
  2841. --echo # Start a statement, which will acquire SR metadata lock on t1, open it
  2842. --echo # and then stop, before trying to acquire SW lock on t2 and opening it.
  2843. set debug_sync='open_tables_after_open_and_process_table SIGNAL parked WAIT_FOR go';
  2844. --echo # Sending:
  2845. --send select * from t1 where i in (select j from t2 for update)
  2846. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con2'.
  2847. connection deadlock_con2;
  2848. --echo # Wait till the above SELECT stops.
  2849. set debug_sync='now WAIT_FOR parked';
  2850. --echo # The below FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK should acquire
  2851. --echo # SNW locks on t1 and t2 and wait till SELECT closes t1.
  2852. --echo # Sending:
  2853. send flush tables t1, t2 with read lock;
  2854. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con3'.
  2855. connection deadlock_con3;
  2856. --echo # Wait until FLUSH TABLES WITH t1, t2 READ LOCK starts waiting
  2857. --echo # for SELECT to close t1.
  2858. let $wait_condition=
  2859. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2860. where state = "Waiting for table flush" and
  2861. info = "flush tables t1, t2 with read lock";
  2862. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2863. --echo # Resume SELECT, so it tries to acquire SW lock on t1 and blocks,
  2864. --echo # creating a deadlock. This deadlock should be detected and resolved
  2865. --echo # by backing-off SELECT. As a result FTWRL should be able to finish.
  2866. set debug_sync='now SIGNAL go';
  2867. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con2'.
  2868. connection deadlock_con2;
  2869. --echo # Reap FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK.
  2870. reap;
  2871. unlock tables;
  2872. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2873. connection deadlock_con1;
  2874. --echo # Reap SELECT.
  2875. reap;
  2876. --echo #
  2877. --echo # The same scenario with a slightly different order of events
  2878. --echo # which emphasizes that setting correct deadlock detector weights
  2879. --echo # for flush waits is important.
  2880. --echo #
  2881. set debug_sync= 'RESET';
  2882. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con2'.
  2883. connection deadlock_con2;
  2884. set debug_sync='flush_tables_with_read_lock_after_acquire_locks SIGNAL parked WAIT_FOR go';
  2885. --echo # The below FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK should acquire
  2886. --echo # SNW locks on t1 and t2 and wait on debug sync point.
  2887. --echo # Sending:
  2888. send flush tables t1, t2 with read lock;
  2889. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2890. connection deadlock_con1;
  2891. --echo # Wait till FLUSH TABLE WITH READ LOCK stops.
  2892. set debug_sync='now WAIT_FOR parked';
  2893. --echo # Start statement which will acquire SR metadata lock on t1, open
  2894. --echo # it and then will block while trying to acquire SW lock on t2.
  2895. --echo # Sending:
  2896. send select * from t1 where i in (select j from t2 for update);
  2897. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con3'.
  2898. connection deadlock_con3;
  2899. --echo # Wait till the above SELECT blocks.
  2900. let $wait_condition=
  2901. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2902. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2903. info = "select * from t1 where i in (select j from t2 for update)";
  2904. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2905. --echo # Resume FLUSH TABLES, so it tries to flush t1, thus creating
  2906. --echo # a deadlock. This deadlock should be detected and resolved by
  2907. --echo # backing-off SELECT. As a result FTWRL should be able to finish.
  2908. set debug_sync='now SIGNAL go';
  2909. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con2'.
  2910. connection deadlock_con2;
  2911. --echo # Reap FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK.
  2912. reap;
  2913. unlock tables;
  2914. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2915. connection deadlock_con1;
  2916. --echo # Reap SELECT.
  2917. reap;
  2918. --echo #
  2919. --echo # Now a more complex scenario involving two connections
  2920. --echo # waiting for MDL and one for TDC.
  2921. --echo #
  2922. set debug_sync= 'RESET';
  2923. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2924. connection deadlock_con1;
  2925. --echo # Start a statement which will acquire SR metadata lock on t2, open it
  2926. --echo # and then stop, before trying to acquire SR on t1 and opening it.
  2927. set debug_sync='open_tables_after_open_and_process_table SIGNAL parked WAIT_FOR go';
  2928. --echo # Sending:
  2929. send select * from t2, t1;
  2930. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con2'.
  2931. connection deadlock_con2;
  2932. --echo # Wait till the above SELECT stops.
  2933. set debug_sync='now WAIT_FOR parked';
  2934. --echo # The below FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK should acquire
  2935. --echo # SNW locks on t2 and wait till SELECT closes t2.
  2936. --echo # Sending:
  2937. send flush tables t2 with read lock;
  2938. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con3'.
  2939. connection deadlock_con3;
  2940. --echo # Wait until FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK starts waiting
  2941. --echo # for SELECT to close t2.
  2942. let $wait_condition=
  2943. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2944. where state = "Waiting for table flush" and
  2945. info = "flush tables t2 with read lock";
  2946. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2947. --echo # The below DROP TABLES should acquire X lock on t1 and start
  2948. --echo # waiting for X lock on t2.
  2949. --echo # Sending:
  2950. send drop tables t1, t2;
  2951. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2952. connection default;
  2953. --echo # Wait until DROP TABLES starts waiting for X lock on t2.
  2954. let $wait_condition=
  2955. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  2956. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  2957. info = "drop tables t1, t2";
  2958. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  2959. --echo # Resume SELECT, so it tries to acquire SR lock on t1 and blocks,
  2960. --echo # creating a deadlock. This deadlock should be detected and resolved
  2961. --echo # by backing-off SELECT. As a result, FTWRL should be able to finish.
  2962. set debug_sync='now SIGNAL go';
  2963. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con2'.
  2964. connection deadlock_con2;
  2965. --echo # Reap FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK.
  2966. reap;
  2967. --echo # Unblock DROP TABLES.
  2968. unlock tables;
  2969. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con3'.
  2970. connection deadlock_con3;
  2971. --echo # Reap DROP TABLES.
  2972. reap;
  2973. --echo # Switching to connection 'deadlock_con1'.
  2974. connection deadlock_con1;
  2975. --echo # Reap SELECT. It should emit error about missing table.
  2976. --error ER_NO_SUCH_TABLE
  2977. reap;
  2978. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  2979. connection default;
  2980. set debug_sync= 'RESET';
  2981. disconnect deadlock_con1;
  2982. disconnect deadlock_con2;
  2983. disconnect deadlock_con3;
  2984. --echo #
  2985. --echo # Test for a scenario in which FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK
  2986. --echo # used to erroneously release metadata locks.
  2987. --echo #
  2988. connect(con1,localhost,root,,);
  2989. connect(con2,localhost,root,,);
  2990. connection default;
  2991. --disable_warnings
  2992. drop tables if exists t1, t2;
  2993. --enable_warnings
  2994. set debug_sync= 'RESET';
  2995. create table t1(i int);
  2996. create table t2(j int);
  2997. --echo # Switching to connection 'con2'.
  2998. connection con2;
  2999. set debug_sync='open_tables_after_open_and_process_table SIGNAL parked WAIT_FOR go';
  3000. --echo # The below FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK should acquire
  3001. --echo # SNW locks on t1 and t2, open table t1 and block on the debug
  3002. --echo # sync point.
  3003. --echo # Sending:
  3004. send flush tables t1, t2 with read lock;
  3005. --echo # Switching to connection 'con1'.
  3006. connection con1;
  3007. --echo # Wait till FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK stops.
  3008. set debug_sync='now WAIT_FOR parked';
  3009. --echo # Start a statement which will flush all tables and thus
  3010. --echo # invalidate table t1 open by FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK.
  3011. --echo # Sending:
  3012. send flush tables;
  3013. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3014. connection default;
  3015. --echo # Wait till the above FLUSH TABLES blocks.
  3016. let $wait_condition=
  3017. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  3018. where state = "Waiting for table flush" and
  3019. info = "flush tables";
  3020. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3021. --echo # Resume FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK, so it tries to open t2
  3022. --echo # discovers that its t1 is obsolete and tries to reopen all tables.
  3023. --echo # Such reopen should not cause releasing of SNW metadata locks
  3024. --echo # which would result in assertion failures.
  3025. set debug_sync='now SIGNAL go';
  3026. --echo # Switching to connection 'con2'.
  3027. connection con2;
  3028. --echo # Reap FLUSH TABLES <list> WITH READ LOCK.
  3029. reap;
  3030. unlock tables;
  3031. --echo # Switching to connection 'con1'.
  3032. connection con1;
  3033. --echo # Reap FLUSH TABLES.
  3034. reap;
  3035. --echo # Clean-up.
  3036. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3037. connection default;
  3038. drop tables t1, t2;
  3039. set debug_sync= 'RESET';
  3040. disconnect con1;
  3041. disconnect con2;
  3042. --echo #
  3043. --echo # Test for bug #46748 "Assertion in MDL_context::wait_for_locks()
  3044. --echo # on INSERT + CREATE TRIGGER".
  3045. --echo #
  3046. --disable_warnings
  3047. drop tables if exists t1, t2, t3, t4, t5;
  3048. --enable_warnings
  3049. --echo # Let us simulate scenario in which we open some tables from extended
  3050. --echo # part of prelocking set but then encounter conflicting metadata lock,
  3051. --echo # so have to back-off and wait for it to go away.
  3052. connect (con1root,localhost,root,,test,,);
  3053. connect (con2root,localhost,root,,test,,);
  3054. connection default;
  3055. create table t1 (i int);
  3056. create table t2 (j int);
  3057. create table t3 (k int);
  3058. create table t4 (l int);
  3059. create trigger t1_bi before insert on t1 for each row
  3060. insert into t2 values (new.i);
  3061. create trigger t2_bi before insert on t2 for each row
  3062. insert into t3 values (new.j);
  3063. --echo #
  3064. --echo # Switching to connection 'con1root'.
  3065. connection con1root;
  3066. lock tables t4 read;
  3067. --echo #
  3068. --echo # Switching to connection 'con2root'.
  3069. connection con2root;
  3070. --echo # Send :
  3071. --send rename table t3 to t5, t4 to t3;
  3072. --echo #
  3073. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3074. connection default;
  3075. --echo # Wait until the above RENAME TABLE adds pending requests for exclusive
  3076. --echo # metadata lock on its tables and blocks due to 't4' being used by LOCK
  3077. --echo # TABLES.
  3078. let $wait_condition= select count(*)= 1 from information_schema.processlist
  3079. where state= 'Waiting for table metadata lock' and
  3080. info='rename table t3 to t5, t4 to t3';
  3081. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3082. --echo # Send :
  3083. --send insert into t1 values (1);
  3084. --echo #
  3085. --echo # Switching to connection 'con1root'.
  3086. connection con1root;
  3087. --echo # Wait until INSERT statement waits due to encountering pending
  3088. --echo # exclusive metadata lock on 't3'.
  3089. let $wait_condition= select count(*)= 1 from information_schema.processlist
  3090. where state= 'Waiting for table metadata lock' and
  3091. info='insert into t1 values (1)';
  3092. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3093. unlock tables;
  3094. --echo #
  3095. --echo # Switching to connection 'con2root'.
  3096. connection con2root;
  3097. --echo # Reap RENAME TABLE.
  3098. --reap
  3099. --echo #
  3100. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3101. connection default;
  3102. --echo # Reap INSERT.
  3103. --reap
  3104. --echo # Clean-up.
  3105. disconnect con1root;
  3106. disconnect con2root;
  3107. drop tables t1, t2, t3, t5;
  3108. --echo #
  3109. --echo # Bug#42546 - Backup: RESTORE fails, thinking it finds an existing table
  3110. --echo #
  3111. --disable_warnings
  3112. DROP TABLE IF EXISTS t1;
  3113. --enable_warnings
  3114. set @save_log_output=@@global.log_output;
  3115. set global log_output=file;
  3116. connect(con2, localhost, root,,);
  3117. --echo #
  3118. --echo # Test 1: CREATE TABLE
  3119. --echo #
  3120. --echo # Connection 2
  3121. connection con2;
  3122. --echo # Start insert on the not-yet existing table
  3123. --echo # Wait after taking the MDL lock
  3124. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'after_open_table_mdl_shared SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR finish';
  3125. --send INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(1,"def")
  3126. --echo # Connection 1
  3127. connection default;
  3128. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  3129. --echo # Now INSERT has a MDL on the non-existent table t1.
  3130. --echo #
  3131. --echo # Continue the INSERT once CREATE waits for exclusive lock
  3132. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'mdl_acquire_lock_wait SIGNAL finish';
  3133. --echo # Try to create that table.
  3134. --send CREATE TABLE t1 (c1 INT, c2 VARCHAR(100), KEY(c1))
  3135. --echo # Connection 2
  3136. --echo # Insert fails
  3137. connection con2;
  3138. --error ER_NO_SUCH_TABLE
  3139. --reap
  3140. --echo # Connection 1
  3141. connection default;
  3142. --reap;
  3143. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'RESET';
  3144. SHOW TABLES;
  3145. --disable_warnings
  3146. DROP TABLE IF EXISTS t1;
  3147. --enable_warnings
  3148. --echo #
  3149. --echo # Test 2: CREATE TABLE LIKE
  3150. --echo #
  3151. CREATE TABLE t2 (c1 INT, c2 VARCHAR(100), KEY(c1));
  3152. --echo # Connection 2
  3153. connection con2;
  3154. --echo # Start insert on the not-yet existing table
  3155. --echo # Wait after taking the MDL
  3156. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'after_open_table_mdl_shared SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR finish';
  3157. --send INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(1,"def")
  3158. --echo # Connection 1
  3159. connection default;
  3160. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  3161. --echo # Now INSERT has a MDL on the non-existent table t1.
  3162. --echo #
  3163. --echo # Continue the INSERT once CREATE waits for exclusive lock
  3164. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'mdl_acquire_lock_wait SIGNAL finish';
  3165. --echo # Try to create that table.
  3166. --send CREATE TABLE t1 LIKE t2
  3167. --echo # Connection 2
  3168. --echo # Insert fails
  3169. connection con2;
  3170. --error ER_NO_SUCH_TABLE
  3171. --reap
  3172. --echo # Connection 1
  3173. connection default;
  3174. --reap
  3175. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'RESET';
  3176. SHOW TABLES;
  3177. DROP TABLE t2;
  3178. disconnect con2;
  3179. --disable_warnings
  3180. DROP TABLE IF EXISTS t1;
  3181. --enable_warnings
  3182. set global log_output=@save_log_output;
  3183. --echo #
  3184. --echo # Bug #46044 "MDL deadlock on LOCK TABLE + CREATE TABLE HIGH_PRIORITY
  3185. --echo # FOR UPDATE"
  3186. --echo #
  3187. --disable_warnings
  3188. drop tables if exists t1, t2;
  3189. --enable_warnings
  3190. connect (con46044, localhost, root,,);
  3191. connect (con46044_2, localhost, root,,);
  3192. connection default;
  3193. create table t1 (i int);
  3194. --echo # Let us check that we won't deadlock if during filling
  3195. --echo # of I_S table we encounter conflicting metadata lock
  3196. --echo # which owner is in its turn waiting for our connection.
  3197. lock tables t1 read;
  3198. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46044'.
  3199. connection con46044;
  3200. --echo # Sending:
  3201. --send create table t2 select * from t1 for update;
  3202. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3203. connection default;
  3204. --echo # Waiting until CREATE TABLE ... SELECT ... is blocked.
  3205. let $wait_condition=
  3206. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  3207. where state = "Waiting for table level lock" and
  3208. info = "create table t2 select * from t1 for update";
  3209. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3210. --echo # First let us check that SHOW FIELDS/DESCRIBE doesn't
  3211. --echo # gets blocked and emits and error.
  3212. --error ER_WARN_I_S_SKIPPED_TABLE
  3213. show fields from t2;
  3214. --echo # Now test for I_S query which reads only .FRMs.
  3215. --echo #
  3216. --echo # Query below should only emit a warning.
  3217. select column_name from information_schema.columns
  3218. where table_schema='test' and table_name='t2';
  3219. --echo # Finally, test for I_S query which does full-blown table open.
  3220. --echo #
  3221. --echo # Query below should not be blocked. Warning message should be
  3222. --echo # stored in the 'table_comment' column.
  3223. select table_name, table_type, auto_increment, table_comment
  3224. from information_schema.tables where table_schema='test' and table_name='t2';
  3225. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3226. connection default;
  3227. unlock tables;
  3228. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46044'.
  3229. connection con46044;
  3230. --echo # Reaping CREATE TABLE ... SELECT ... .
  3231. --reap
  3232. drop table t2;
  3233. --echo #
  3234. --echo # Let us also check that queries to I_S wait for conflicting metadata
  3235. --echo # locks to go away instead of skipping table with a warning in cases
  3236. --echo # when deadlock is not possible. This is a nice thing from compatibility
  3237. --echo # and ease of use points of view.
  3238. --echo #
  3239. --echo # We check same three queries to I_S in this new situation.
  3240. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46044_2'.
  3241. connection con46044_2;
  3242. lock tables t1 read;
  3243. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46044'.
  3244. connection con46044;
  3245. --echo # Sending:
  3246. --send create table t2 select * from t1 for update;
  3247. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3248. connection default;
  3249. --echo # Waiting until CREATE TABLE ... SELECT ... is blocked.
  3250. let $wait_condition=
  3251. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  3252. where state = "Waiting for table level lock" and
  3253. info = "create table t2 select * from t1 for update";
  3254. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3255. --echo # Let us check that SHOW FIELDS/DESCRIBE gets blocked.
  3256. --echo # Sending:
  3257. --send show fields from t2;
  3258. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46044_2'.
  3259. connection con46044_2;
  3260. --echo # Wait until SHOW FIELDS gets blocked.
  3261. let $wait_condition=
  3262. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  3263. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  3264. info = "show fields from t2";
  3265. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3266. unlock tables;
  3267. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46044'.
  3268. connection con46044;
  3269. --echo # Reaping CREATE TABLE ... SELECT ... .
  3270. --reap
  3271. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3272. connection default;
  3273. --echo # Reaping SHOW FIELDS ...
  3274. --reap
  3275. drop table t2;
  3276. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46044_2'.
  3277. connection con46044_2;
  3278. lock tables t1 read;
  3279. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46044'.
  3280. connection con46044;
  3281. --echo # Sending:
  3282. --send create table t2 select * from t1 for update;
  3283. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3284. connection default;
  3285. --echo # Waiting until CREATE TABLE ... SELECT ... is blocked.
  3286. let $wait_condition=
  3287. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  3288. where state = "Waiting for table level lock" and
  3289. info = "create table t2 select * from t1 for update";
  3290. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3291. --echo # Check that I_S query which reads only .FRMs gets blocked.
  3292. --echo # Sending:
  3293. --send select column_name from information_schema.columns where table_schema='test' and table_name='t2';
  3294. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46044_2'.
  3295. connection con46044_2;
  3296. --echo # Wait until SELECT COLUMN_NAME FROM I_S.COLUMNS gets blocked.
  3297. let $wait_condition=
  3298. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  3299. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  3300. info like "select column_name from information_schema.columns%";
  3301. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3302. unlock tables;
  3303. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46044'.
  3304. connection con46044;
  3305. --echo # Reaping CREATE TABLE ... SELECT ... .
  3306. --reap
  3307. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3308. connection default;
  3309. --echo # Reaping SELECT COLUMN_NAME FROM I_S.COLUMNS
  3310. --reap
  3311. drop table t2;
  3312. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46044_2'.
  3313. connection con46044_2;
  3314. lock tables t1 read;
  3315. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46044'.
  3316. connection con46044;
  3317. --echo # Sending:
  3318. --send create table t2 select * from t1 for update;
  3319. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3320. connection default;
  3321. --echo # Waiting until CREATE TABLE ... SELECT ... is blocked.
  3322. let $wait_condition=
  3323. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  3324. where state = "Waiting for table level lock" and
  3325. info = "create table t2 select * from t1 for update";
  3326. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3327. --echo # Finally, check that I_S query which does full-blown table open
  3328. --echo # also gets blocked.
  3329. --echo # Sending:
  3330. --send select table_name, table_type, auto_increment, table_comment from information_schema.tables where table_schema='test' and table_name='t2';
  3331. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46044_2'.
  3332. connection con46044_2;
  3333. --echo # Wait until SELECT ... FROM I_S.TABLES gets blocked.
  3334. let $wait_condition=
  3335. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  3336. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  3337. info like "select table_name, table_type, auto_increment, table_comment from information_schema.tables%";
  3338. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3339. unlock tables;
  3340. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46044'.
  3341. connection con46044;
  3342. --echo # Reaping CREATE TABLE ... SELECT ... .
  3343. --reap
  3344. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3345. connection default;
  3346. --echo # Reaping SELECT ... FROM I_S.TABLES
  3347. --reap
  3348. drop table t2;
  3349. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3350. connection default;
  3351. --echo # Clean-up.
  3352. disconnect con46044;
  3353. disconnect con46044_2;
  3354. drop table t1;
  3355. --echo #
  3356. --echo # Test for bug #46273 "MySQL 5.4.4 new MDL: Bug#989 is not fully fixed
  3357. --echo # in case of ALTER".
  3358. --echo #
  3359. --disable_warnings
  3360. drop table if exists t1;
  3361. --enable_warnings
  3362. set debug_sync= 'RESET';
  3363. connect (con46273,localhost,root,,test,,);
  3364. connection default;
  3365. create table t1 (c1 int primary key, c2 int, c3 int);
  3366. insert into t1 values (1,1,0),(2,2,0),(3,3,0),(4,4,0),(5,5,0);
  3367. begin;
  3368. select * from t1 where c2 = 3;
  3369. --echo #
  3370. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46273'.
  3371. connection con46273;
  3372. set debug_sync='after_lock_tables_takes_lock SIGNAL alter_table_locked WAIT_FOR alter_go';
  3373. --send alter table t1 add column e int, rename to t2;
  3374. --echo #
  3375. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3376. connection default;
  3377. set debug_sync='now WAIT_FOR alter_table_locked';
  3378. set debug_sync='mdl_acquire_lock_wait SIGNAL alter_go';
  3379. --echo # The below statement should get ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error
  3380. --echo # (i.e. it should not allow ALTER to proceed, and then
  3381. --echo # fail due to 't1' changing its name to 't2').
  3382. --error ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK
  3383. update t1 set c3=c3+1 where c2 = 3;
  3384. --echo #
  3385. --echo # Let us check that failure of the above statement has not released
  3386. --echo # metadata lock on table 't1', i.e. that ALTER TABLE is still blocked.
  3387. let $wait_condition=
  3388. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  3389. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  3390. info = "alter table t1 add column e int, rename to t2";
  3391. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3392. --echo # Unblock ALTER TABLE by commiting transaction and thus releasing
  3393. --echo # metadata lock on 't1'.
  3394. commit;
  3395. --echo #
  3396. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46273'.
  3397. connection con46273;
  3398. --echo # Reap ALTER TABLE.
  3399. --reap
  3400. --echo #
  3401. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3402. connection default;
  3403. disconnect con46273;
  3404. --echo # Clean-up.
  3405. set debug_sync= 'RESET';
  3406. drop table t2;
  3407. --echo #
  3408. --echo # Test for bug #46673 "Deadlock between FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK
  3409. --echo # and DML".
  3410. --echo #
  3411. --disable_warnings
  3412. drop tables if exists t1;
  3413. --enable_warnings
  3414. connect (con46673, localhost, root,,);
  3415. connection default;
  3416. create table t1 (i int);
  3417. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46673'.
  3418. connection con46673;
  3419. begin;
  3420. insert into t1 values (1);
  3421. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3422. connection default;
  3423. --echo # Statement below should not get blocked. And if after some
  3424. --echo # changes to code it is there should not be a deadlock between
  3425. --echo # it and transaction from connection 'con46673'.
  3426. flush tables with read lock;
  3427. unlock tables;
  3428. --echo # Switching to connection 'con46673'.
  3429. connection con46673;
  3430. delete from t1 where i = 1;
  3431. commit;
  3432. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3433. connection default;
  3434. --echo # Clean-up
  3435. disconnect con46673;
  3436. drop table t1;
  3437. --echo #
  3438. --echo # Bug#48210 FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK deadlocks
  3439. --echo # against concurrent CREATE PROCEDURE
  3440. --echo #
  3441. connect (con2, localhost, root);
  3442. --echo # Test 1: CREATE PROCEDURE
  3443. --echo # Connection 1
  3444. connection default;
  3445. --echo # Start CREATE PROCEDURE and open mysql.proc
  3446. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'after_open_table_mdl_shared SIGNAL table_opened WAIT_FOR grlwait';
  3447. --send CREATE PROCEDURE p1() SELECT 1
  3448. --echo # Connection 2
  3449. connection con2;
  3450. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR table_opened';
  3451. --echo # Check that FLUSH must wait to get the GRL
  3452. --echo # and let CREATE PROCEDURE continue
  3453. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'wait_lock_global_read_lock SIGNAL grlwait';
  3454. --send FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK
  3455. --echo # Connection 1
  3456. connection default;
  3457. --reap
  3458. --echo # Connection 2
  3459. connection con2;
  3460. --reap
  3461. UNLOCK TABLES;
  3462. --echo # Connection 1
  3463. connection default;
  3464. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'RESET';
  3465. --echo # Test 2: DROP PROCEDURE
  3466. connection default;
  3467. --echo # Start DROP PROCEDURE and open tables
  3468. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'after_open_table_mdl_shared SIGNAL table_opened WAIT_FOR grlwait';
  3469. --send DROP PROCEDURE p1
  3470. --echo # Connection 2
  3471. connection con2;
  3472. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR table_opened';
  3473. --echo # Check that FLUSH must wait to get the GRL
  3474. --echo # and let DROP PROCEDURE continue
  3475. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'wait_lock_global_read_lock SIGNAL grlwait';
  3476. --send FLUSH TABLES WITH READ LOCK
  3477. --echo # Connection 1
  3478. connection default;
  3479. --reap
  3480. --echo # Connection 2
  3481. connection con2;
  3482. --reap
  3483. UNLOCK TABLES;
  3484. --echo # Connection 1
  3485. connection default;
  3486. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'RESET';
  3487. disconnect con2;
  3488. --echo #
  3489. --echo # Bug#50786 Assertion `thd->mdl_context.trans_sentinel() == __null'
  3490. --echo # failed in open_ltable()
  3491. --echo #
  3492. --echo # Supress warnings written to the log file
  3493. call mtr.add_suppression("Wait on a lock was aborted due to a pending exclusive lock");
  3494. --disable_warnings
  3495. DROP TABLE IF EXISTS t1, t2;
  3496. --enable_warnings
  3497. connect (con1,localhost,root);
  3498. connect (con2,localhost,root);
  3499. connect (con3,localhost,root);
  3500. connection default;
  3501. CREATE TABLE t1 (i INT);
  3502. CREATE TABLE t2 (i INT);
  3503. SET @old_general_log= @@global.general_log;
  3504. SET @@global.general_log= 1;
  3505. SET @old_log_output= @@global.log_output;
  3506. SET @@global.log_output= 'TABLE';
  3507. SET @old_sql_log_off= @@session.sql_log_off;
  3508. SET @@session.sql_log_off= 1;
  3509. --echo # connection: con1
  3510. connection con1;
  3511. HANDLER t1 OPEN;
  3512. --echo # connection: con3
  3513. connection con3;
  3514. SET @@session.sql_log_off= 1;
  3515. --echo # connection: con2
  3516. connection con2;
  3517. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'thr_multi_lock_after_thr_lock SIGNAL parked WAIT_FOR go';
  3518. # The below statement will block on the debug sync point
  3519. # after it gets write lock on mysql.general_log table.
  3520. --echo # Sending:
  3521. --send SELECT 1
  3522. --echo # connection: con3
  3523. connection con3;
  3524. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR parked';
  3525. --echo # connection: con1
  3526. connection con1;
  3527. # This statement will block in open_ltable() when
  3528. # trying to write into mysql.general_log.
  3529. --echo # Sending:
  3530. --send SELECT 1
  3531. --echo # connection: con3
  3532. connection con3;
  3533. let $wait_condition=
  3534. SELECT COUNT(*) = 1 FROM information_schema.processlist
  3535. WHERE state = "Waiting for table level lock" and info = "SELECT 1";
  3536. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3537. # The ALTER below will try to abort the statement in connection con1,
  3538. # since the latter waits on a table-level lock while having a HANDLER
  3539. # open. This will cause mysql_lock_tables() in con1 fail which before
  3540. # triggered the assert.
  3541. ALTER TABLE t1 ADD COLUMN j INT;
  3542. --echo # connection: default
  3543. connection default;
  3544. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now SIGNAL go';
  3545. --echo # connection: con1
  3546. connection con1;
  3547. --echo # Reaping SELECT 1
  3548. --reap
  3549. HANDLER t1 CLOSE;
  3550. --echo # connection: con2
  3551. connection con2;
  3552. --echo # Reaping SELECT 1
  3553. --reap
  3554. --echo # connection: default
  3555. connection default;
  3556. DROP TABLE t1, t2;
  3557. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'RESET';
  3558. disconnect con1;
  3559. disconnect con2;
  3560. disconnect con3;
  3561. SET @@global.general_log= @old_general_log;
  3562. SET @@global.log_output= @old_log_output;
  3563. SET @@session.sql_log_off= @old_sql_log_off;
  3564. --echo #
  3565. --echo # Additional coverage for bug #50913 "Deadlock between
  3566. --echo # open_and_lock_tables_derived and MDL". The main test
  3567. --echo # case is in lock_multi.test
  3568. --echo #
  3569. --disable_warnings
  3570. drop table if exists t1;
  3571. --enable_warnings
  3572. set debug_sync= 'RESET';
  3573. connect (con50913_1,localhost,root);
  3574. connect (con50913_2,localhost,root);
  3575. connection default;
  3576. create table t1 (i int) engine=InnoDB;
  3577. --echo # Switching to connection 'con50913_1'.
  3578. connection con50913_1;
  3579. set debug_sync= 'thr_multi_lock_after_thr_lock SIGNAL parked WAIT_FOR go';
  3580. --echo # Sending:
  3581. --send alter table t1 add column j int
  3582. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3583. connection default;
  3584. --echo # Wait until ALTER TABLE gets blocked on a sync point after
  3585. --echo # acquiring thr_lock.c lock.
  3586. set debug_sync= 'now WAIT_FOR parked';
  3587. --echo # The below statement should wait on MDL lock and not deadlock on
  3588. --echo # thr_lock.c lock.
  3589. --echo # Sending:
  3590. --send truncate table t1
  3591. --echo # Switching to connection 'con50913_2'.
  3592. connection con50913_2;
  3593. --echo # Wait until TRUNCATE TABLE is blocked on MDL lock.
  3594. let $wait_condition=
  3595. select count(*) = 1 from information_schema.processlist
  3596. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  3597. info = "truncate table t1";
  3598. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3599. --echo # Unblock ALTER TABLE.
  3600. set debug_sync= 'now SIGNAL go';
  3601. --echo # Switching to connection 'con50913_1'.
  3602. connection con50913_1;
  3603. --echo # Reaping ALTER TABLE.
  3604. --reap
  3605. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3606. connection default;
  3607. --echo # Reaping TRUNCATE TABLE.
  3608. --reap
  3609. disconnect con50913_1;
  3610. disconnect con50913_2;
  3611. set debug_sync= 'RESET';
  3612. drop table t1;
  3613. --echo #
  3614. --echo # Test for bug #50998 "Deadlock in MDL code during test
  3615. --echo # rqg_mdl_stability".
  3616. --echo # Also provides coverage for the case when addition of
  3617. --echo # waiting statement adds several loops in the waiters
  3618. --echo # graph and therefore several searches for deadlock
  3619. --echo # should be performed.
  3620. --disable_warnings
  3621. drop table if exists t1;
  3622. --enable_warnings
  3623. set debug_sync= 'RESET';
  3624. connect (con1,localhost,root);
  3625. connect (con2,localhost,root);
  3626. connect (con3,localhost,root);
  3627. connection default;
  3628. create table t1 (i int);
  3629. --echo # Switching to connection 'con1'.
  3630. connection con1;
  3631. begin;
  3632. select * from t1;
  3633. --echo # Switching to connection 'con2'.
  3634. connection con2;
  3635. begin;
  3636. select * from t1;
  3637. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3638. connection default;
  3639. --echo # Start ALTER TABLE which will acquire SNW lock and
  3640. --echo # table lock and get blocked on sync point.
  3641. set debug_sync= 'thr_multi_lock_after_thr_lock SIGNAL parked WAIT_FOR go';
  3642. --echo # Sending:
  3643. --send alter table t1 add column j int
  3644. --echo # Switching to connection 'con1'.
  3645. connection con1;
  3646. --echo # Wait until ALTER TABLE gets blocked on a sync point.
  3647. set debug_sync= 'now WAIT_FOR parked';
  3648. --echo # Sending:
  3649. --send insert into t1 values (1)
  3650. --echo # Switching to connection 'con2'.
  3651. connection con2;
  3652. --echo # Sending:
  3653. --send insert into t1 values (1)
  3654. --echo # Switching to connection 'con3'.
  3655. connection con3;
  3656. --echo # Wait until both 'con1' and 'con2' are blocked trying to acquire
  3657. --echo # SW lock on the table.
  3658. let $wait_condition=
  3659. select count(*) = 2 from information_schema.processlist
  3660. where state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" and
  3661. info = "insert into t1 values (1)";
  3662. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3663. --echo # Unblock ALTER TABLE. Since it will try to upgrade SNW to X lock
  3664. --echo # deadlock with two loops in waiting graph will occur. Both loops
  3665. --echo # should be found and DML statements in both 'con1' and 'con2'
  3666. --echo # should be aborted with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK errors.
  3667. set debug_sync= 'now SIGNAL go';
  3668. --echo # Switching to connection 'con1'.
  3669. connection con1;
  3670. --echo # Reaping INSERT. It should end with ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK error and
  3671. --echo # not wait indefinitely (as it happened before the bugfix).
  3672. --error ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK
  3673. --reap
  3674. commit;
  3675. --echo # Switching to connection 'con2'.
  3676. connection con2;
  3677. --echo # Reaping INSERT.
  3678. --error ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK
  3679. --reap
  3680. commit;
  3681. --echo # Switching to connection 'default'.
  3682. connection default;
  3683. --echo # Reap ALTER TABLE.
  3684. --reap
  3685. disconnect con1;
  3686. disconnect con2;
  3687. disconnect con3;
  3688. connection default;
  3689. set debug_sync= 'RESET';
  3690. drop table t1;
  3691. --echo #
  3692. --echo # Bug#42643: InnoDB does not support replication of TRUNCATE TABLE
  3693. --echo #
  3694. --echo # Ensure that a acquired lock is not given up due to a conflict.
  3695. --echo #
  3696. connect (con1,localhost,root,,test,,);
  3697. connect (con2,localhost,root,,test,,);
  3698. connect (con3,localhost,root,,test,,);
  3699. connection default;
  3700. --disable_warnings
  3701. DROP TABLE IF EXISTS t1;
  3702. --enable_warnings
  3703. CREATE TABLE t1 (a INT) ENGINE=InnoDB;
  3704. INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (1),(2),(3);
  3705. --echo # Connection: con1
  3706. connection con1;
  3707. LOCK TABLES t1 WRITE;
  3708. SET debug_sync='upgrade_lock_for_truncate SIGNAL parked_truncate WAIT_FOR go_truncate';
  3709. send TRUNCATE TABLE t1;
  3710. connection default;
  3711. --echo # Connection: default
  3712. SET debug_sync='now WAIT_FOR parked_truncate';
  3713. connection con2;
  3714. --echo # Connection: con2
  3715. SET debug_sync='after_open_table_ignore_flush SIGNAL parked_show WAIT_FOR go_show';
  3716. send SHOW FIELDS FROM t1;
  3717. connection default;
  3718. --echo # Connection: default
  3719. SET debug_sync='now WAIT_FOR parked_show';
  3720. connection con3;
  3721. --echo # Connection: con3
  3722. SET debug_sync='after_flush_unlock SIGNAL parked_flush WAIT_FOR go_flush';
  3723. send FLUSH TABLES t1;
  3724. connection default;
  3725. --echo # Connection: default
  3726. SET debug_sync='now WAIT_FOR parked_flush';
  3727. SET debug_sync='now SIGNAL go_truncate';
  3728. --echo # Ensure that truncate waits for a exclusive lock
  3729. let $wait_condition=SELECT COUNT(*)=1 FROM information_schema.processlist
  3730. WHERE state='Waiting for table metadata lock' AND info='TRUNCATE TABLE t1';
  3731. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3732. SET debug_sync= 'now SIGNAL go_show';
  3733. connection con1;
  3734. --echo # Connection: con1 (TRUNCATE)
  3735. --echo # Reaping...
  3736. reap;
  3737. UNLOCK TABLES;
  3738. connection con2;
  3739. --echo # Connection: con2 (SHOW FIELDS FROM t1)
  3740. --echo # Reaping...
  3741. reap;
  3742. connection default;
  3743. --echo # Connection: default
  3744. SET debug_sync= 'now SIGNAL go_flush';
  3745. connection con3;
  3746. --echo # Connection: con3 (FLUSH TABLES t1)
  3747. --echo # Reaping...
  3748. reap;
  3749. disconnect con1;
  3750. disconnect con2;
  3751. disconnect con3;
  3752. connection default;
  3753. --echo # Connection: default
  3754. SET debug_sync= 'RESET';
  3755. DROP TABLE t1;
  3756. --echo #
  3757. --echo # Bug#52856 concurrent show columns or show full columns causes a crash!!!
  3758. --echo #
  3759. CREATE TABLE t1(a CHAR(255));
  3760. connect(con1, localhost, root);
  3761. SET DEBUG_SYNC= "get_schema_column SIGNAL waiting WAIT_FOR completed";
  3762. --send SHOW FULL COLUMNS FROM t1
  3763. connection default;
  3764. SET DEBUG_SYNC= "now WAIT_FOR waiting";
  3765. --replace_column 8 #
  3766. SHOW FULL COLUMNS FROM t1;
  3767. SET DEBUG_SYNC= "now SIGNAL completed";
  3768. --replace_column 8 #
  3769. connection con1;
  3770. --reap
  3771. connection default;
  3772. DROP TABLE t1;
  3773. disconnect con1;
  3774. --echo #
  3775. --echo # Tests for schema-scope locks
  3776. --echo #
  3777. --disable_warnings
  3778. DROP DATABASE IF EXISTS db1;
  3779. DROP DATABASE IF EXISTS db2;
  3780. --enable_warnings
  3781. connect (con2, localhost, root);
  3782. connect (con3, localhost, root);
  3783. --echo # Test 1:
  3784. --echo # CREATE DATABASE blocks database DDL on the same database, but
  3785. --echo # not database DDL on different databases. Tests X vs X lock.
  3786. --echo #
  3787. --echo # Connection default
  3788. connection default;
  3789. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'after_wait_locked_schema_name SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR blocked';
  3790. --echo # Sending:
  3791. --send CREATE DATABASE db1
  3792. --echo # Connection con2
  3793. connection con2;
  3794. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  3795. --echo # Sending:
  3796. # This should block.
  3797. --send CREATE DATABASE db1
  3798. --echo # Connection con3
  3799. connection con3;
  3800. let $wait_condition=SELECT COUNT(*)=1 FROM information_schema.processlist
  3801. WHERE state='Waiting for schema metadata lock' AND info='CREATE DATABASE db1';
  3802. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3803. # This should not block.
  3804. CREATE DATABASE db2;
  3805. ALTER DATABASE db2 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8;
  3806. DROP DATABASE db2;
  3807. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now SIGNAL blocked';
  3808. --echo # Connection default
  3809. connection default;
  3810. --echo # Reaping: CREATE DATABASE db1
  3811. --reap
  3812. --echo # Connection con2
  3813. connection con2;
  3814. --echo # Reaping: CREATE DATABASE db1
  3815. --error ER_DB_CREATE_EXISTS
  3816. --reap
  3817. --echo # Test 2:
  3818. --echo # ALTER DATABASE blocks database DDL on the same database, but
  3819. --echo # not database DDL on different databases. Tests X vs X lock.
  3820. --echo #
  3821. --echo # Connection default
  3822. connection default;
  3823. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'after_wait_locked_schema_name SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR blocked';
  3824. --echo # Sending:
  3825. --send ALTER DATABASE db1 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8
  3826. --echo # Connection con2
  3827. connection con2;
  3828. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  3829. --echo # Sending:
  3830. # This should block.
  3831. --send ALTER DATABASE db1 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8
  3832. --echo # Connection con3
  3833. connection con3;
  3834. let $wait_condition=SELECT COUNT(*)=1 FROM information_schema.processlist
  3835. WHERE state='Waiting for schema metadata lock'
  3836. AND info='ALTER DATABASE db1 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8';
  3837. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3838. # This should not block.
  3839. CREATE DATABASE db2;
  3840. ALTER DATABASE db2 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8;
  3841. DROP DATABASE db2;
  3842. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now SIGNAL blocked';
  3843. --echo # Connection default
  3844. connection default;
  3845. --echo # Reaping: ALTER DATABASE db1 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8
  3846. --reap
  3847. --echo # Connection con2
  3848. connection con2;
  3849. --echo # Reaping: ALTER DATABASE db1 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8
  3850. --reap
  3851. --echo # Connection default
  3852. connection default;
  3853. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'after_wait_locked_schema_name SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR blocked';
  3854. --echo # Sending:
  3855. --send ALTER DATABASE db1 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8
  3856. --echo # Connection con2
  3857. connection con2;
  3858. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  3859. --echo # Sending:
  3860. # This should also block.
  3861. --send DROP DATABASE db1
  3862. --echo # Connection con3
  3863. connection con3;
  3864. let $wait_condition=SELECT COUNT(*)=1 FROM information_schema.processlist
  3865. WHERE state='Waiting for schema metadata lock' AND info='DROP DATABASE db1';
  3866. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3867. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now SIGNAL blocked';
  3868. --echo # Connection default
  3869. connection default;
  3870. --echo # Reaping: ALTER DATABASE db1 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8
  3871. --reap
  3872. --echo # Connection con2
  3873. connection con2;
  3874. --echo # Reaping: DROP DATABASE db1
  3875. --reap
  3876. # Recreate the database
  3877. CREATE DATABASE db1;
  3878. --echo # Test 3:
  3879. --echo # Two ALTER..UPGRADE of the same database are mutually exclusive, but
  3880. --echo # two ALTER..UPGRADE of different databases are not. Tests X vs X lock.
  3881. --echo #
  3882. let $MYSQLD_DATADIR= `select @@datadir`;
  3883. # Manually make a 5.0 database from the template
  3884. --mkdir $MYSQLD_DATADIR/a-b-c
  3885. --copy_file $MYSQLD_DATADIR/db1/db.opt $MYSQLD_DATADIR/a-b-c/db.opt
  3886. --mkdir $MYSQLD_DATADIR/a-b-c-d
  3887. --copy_file $MYSQLD_DATADIR/db1/db.opt $MYSQLD_DATADIR/a-b-c-d/db.opt
  3888. --echo # Connection default
  3889. connection default;
  3890. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'after_wait_locked_schema_name SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR blocked';
  3891. --echo # Sending:
  3892. --send ALTER DATABASE `#mysql50#a-b-c` UPGRADE DATA DIRECTORY NAME
  3893. --echo # Connection con2
  3894. connection con2;
  3895. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  3896. --echo # Sending:
  3897. # This should block.
  3898. --send ALTER DATABASE `#mysql50#a-b-c` UPGRADE DATA DIRECTORY NAME
  3899. --echo # Connection con3
  3900. connection con3;
  3901. let $wait_condition=SELECT COUNT(*)=1 FROM information_schema.processlist
  3902. WHERE state='Waiting for schema metadata lock'
  3903. AND info='ALTER DATABASE `#mysql50#a-b-c` UPGRADE DATA DIRECTORY NAME';
  3904. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3905. # This should not block.
  3906. ALTER DATABASE `#mysql50#a-b-c-d` UPGRADE DATA DIRECTORY NAME;
  3907. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now SIGNAL blocked';
  3908. --echo # Connection default
  3909. connection default;
  3910. --echo # Reaping: ALTER DATABASE '#mysql50#a-b-c' UPGRADE DATA DIRECTORY NAME
  3911. --reap
  3912. --echo # Connection con2
  3913. connection con2;
  3914. --echo # Reaping: ALTER DATABASE '#mysql50#a-b-c' UPGRADE DATA DIRECTORY NAME
  3915. --error ER_BAD_DB_ERROR
  3916. --reap
  3917. DROP DATABASE `a-b-c`;
  3918. DROP DATABASE `a-b-c-d`;
  3919. --echo # Test 4:
  3920. --echo # DROP DATABASE blocks database DDL on the same database, but
  3921. --echo # not database DDL on different databases. Tests X vs X lock.
  3922. --echo #
  3923. --echo # Connection default
  3924. connection default;
  3925. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'after_wait_locked_schema_name SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR blocked';
  3926. --echo # Sending:
  3927. --send DROP DATABASE db1
  3928. --echo # Connection con2
  3929. connection con2;
  3930. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  3931. --echo # Sending:
  3932. # This should block.
  3933. --send DROP DATABASE db1
  3934. --echo # Connection con3
  3935. connection con3;
  3936. let $wait_condition=SELECT COUNT(*)=1 FROM information_schema.processlist
  3937. WHERE state='Waiting for schema metadata lock' AND info='DROP DATABASE db1';
  3938. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3939. # This should not block.
  3940. CREATE DATABASE db2;
  3941. ALTER DATABASE db2 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8;
  3942. DROP DATABASE db2;
  3943. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now SIGNAL blocked';
  3944. --echo # Connection default
  3945. connection default;
  3946. --echo # Reaping: DROP DATABASE db1
  3947. --reap
  3948. --echo # Connection con2
  3949. connection con2;
  3950. --echo # Reaping: DROP DATABASE db1
  3951. --error ER_DB_DROP_EXISTS
  3952. --reap
  3953. --echo # Connection default
  3954. connection default;
  3955. CREATE DATABASE db1;
  3956. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'after_wait_locked_schema_name SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR blocked';
  3957. --echo # Sending:
  3958. --send DROP DATABASE db1
  3959. --echo # Connection con2
  3960. connection con2;
  3961. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  3962. --echo # Sending:
  3963. # This should also block.
  3964. --send ALTER DATABASE db1 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8
  3965. --echo # Connection con3
  3966. connection con3;
  3967. let $wait_condition=SELECT COUNT(*)=1 FROM information_schema.processlist
  3968. WHERE state='Waiting for schema metadata lock'
  3969. AND info='ALTER DATABASE db1 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8';
  3970. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  3971. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now SIGNAL blocked';
  3972. --echo # Connection default
  3973. connection default;
  3974. --echo # Reaping: DROP DATABASE db1
  3975. --reap
  3976. --echo # Connection con2
  3977. connection con2;
  3978. --echo # Reaping: ALTER DATABASE db1 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8
  3979. # Error 1 is from ALTER DATABASE when the database does not exist.
  3980. # Listing the error twice to prevent result diffences based on filename.
  3981. --error 1,1
  3982. --reap
  3983. --echo # Test 5:
  3984. --echo # Locked database name prevents CREATE of tables in that database.
  3985. --echo # Tests X vs IX lock.
  3986. --echo #
  3987. --echo # Connection default
  3988. connection default;
  3989. CREATE DATABASE db1;
  3990. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'after_wait_locked_schema_name SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR blocked';
  3991. --echo # Sending:
  3992. --send DROP DATABASE db1
  3993. --echo # Connection con2
  3994. connection con2;
  3995. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  3996. --echo # Sending:
  3997. # This should block.
  3998. --send CREATE TABLE db1.t1 (a INT)
  3999. --echo # Connection con3
  4000. connection con3;
  4001. let $wait_condition=SELECT COUNT(*)=1 FROM information_schema.processlist
  4002. WHERE state='Waiting for schema metadata lock' AND
  4003. info='CREATE TABLE db1.t1 (a INT)';
  4004. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  4005. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now SIGNAL blocked';
  4006. --echo # Connection default
  4007. connection default;
  4008. --echo # Reaping: DROP DATABASE db1
  4009. --reap
  4010. --echo # Connection con2
  4011. connection con2;
  4012. --echo # Reaping: CREATE TABLE db1.t1 (a INT)
  4013. --error ER_BAD_DB_ERROR
  4014. --reap
  4015. --echo # Test 6:
  4016. --echo # Locked database name prevents RENAME of tables to/from that database.
  4017. --echo # Tests X vs IX lock.
  4018. --echo #
  4019. --echo # Connection default
  4020. connection default;
  4021. CREATE DATABASE db1;
  4022. CREATE TABLE db1.t1 (a INT);
  4023. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'after_wait_locked_schema_name SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR blocked';
  4024. --echo # Sending:
  4025. --send DROP DATABASE db1
  4026. --echo # Connection con2
  4027. connection con2;
  4028. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  4029. --echo # Sending:
  4030. # This should block.
  4031. --send RENAME TABLE db1.t1 TO test.t1
  4032. --echo # Connection con3
  4033. connection con3;
  4034. let $wait_condition=SELECT COUNT(*)=1 FROM information_schema.processlist
  4035. WHERE state='Waiting for schema metadata lock' AND
  4036. info='RENAME TABLE db1.t1 TO test.t1';
  4037. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  4038. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now SIGNAL blocked';
  4039. --echo # Connection default
  4040. connection default;
  4041. --echo # Reaping: DROP DATABASE db1
  4042. --reap
  4043. --echo # Connection con2
  4044. connection con2;
  4045. --echo # Reaping: RENAME TABLE db1.t1 TO test.t1
  4046. --error ER_FILE_NOT_FOUND, ER_FILE_NOT_FOUND
  4047. --reap
  4048. --echo # Connection default
  4049. connection default;
  4050. CREATE DATABASE db1;
  4051. CREATE TABLE test.t2 (a INT);
  4052. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'after_wait_locked_schema_name SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR blocked';
  4053. --echo # Sending:
  4054. --send DROP DATABASE db1
  4055. --echo # Connection con2
  4056. connection con2;
  4057. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  4058. --echo # Sending:
  4059. # This should block.
  4060. --send RENAME TABLE test.t2 TO db1.t2
  4061. --echo # Connection con3
  4062. connection con3;
  4063. let $wait_condition=SELECT COUNT(*)=1 FROM information_schema.processlist
  4064. WHERE state='Waiting for schema metadata lock' AND
  4065. info='RENAME TABLE test.t2 TO db1.t2';
  4066. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  4067. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now SIGNAL blocked';
  4068. --echo # Connection default
  4069. connection default;
  4070. --echo # Reaping: DROP DATABASE db1
  4071. --reap
  4072. --echo # Connection con2
  4073. connection con2;
  4074. --echo # Reaping: RENAME TABLE test.t2 TO db1.t2
  4075. # Error 7 is from RENAME TABLE where the target database does not exist.
  4076. # Listing the error twice to prevent result diffences based on filename.
  4077. --error 7, 7
  4078. --reap
  4079. DROP TABLE test.t2;
  4080. --echo # Test 7:
  4081. --echo # Locked database name prevents DROP of tables in that database.
  4082. --echo # Tests X vs IX lock.
  4083. --echo #
  4084. --echo # Connection default
  4085. connection default;
  4086. CREATE DATABASE db1;
  4087. CREATE TABLE db1.t1 (a INT);
  4088. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'after_wait_locked_schema_name SIGNAL locked WAIT_FOR blocked';
  4089. --echo # Sending:
  4090. --send DROP DATABASE db1
  4091. --echo # Connection con2
  4092. connection con2;
  4093. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR locked';
  4094. --echo # Sending:
  4095. # This should block.
  4096. --send DROP TABLE db1.t1
  4097. --echo # Connection con3
  4098. connection con3;
  4099. let $wait_condition=SELECT COUNT(*)=1 FROM information_schema.processlist
  4100. WHERE state='Waiting for schema metadata lock' AND info='DROP TABLE db1.t1';
  4101. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  4102. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now SIGNAL blocked';
  4103. --echo # Connection default
  4104. connection default;
  4105. --echo # Reaping: DROP DATABASE db1
  4106. --reap
  4107. --echo # Connection con2
  4108. connection con2;
  4109. --echo # Reaping: DROP TABLE db1.t1
  4110. --error ER_BAD_TABLE_ERROR
  4111. --reap
  4112. --echo # Connection default
  4113. connection default;
  4114. disconnect con2;
  4115. disconnect con3;
  4116. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'RESET';
  4117. --echo #
  4118. --echo # End of tests for schema-scope locks
  4119. --echo #
  4120. --echo #
  4121. --echo # Tests of granted global S lock (FLUSH TABLE WITH READ LOCK)
  4122. --echo #
  4123. CREATE DATABASE db1;
  4124. CREATE TABLE db1.t1(a INT);
  4125. connect(con2, localhost, root);
  4126. connect(con3, localhost, root);
  4127. --echo # Connection default
  4128. connection default;
  4129. FLUSH TABLE WITH READ LOCK;
  4130. --echo # Connection con2
  4131. connection con2;
  4132. # IX global lock should block
  4133. --send CREATE TABLE db1.t2(a INT)
  4134. --echo # Connection default
  4135. connection default;
  4136. let $wait_condition=SELECT COUNT(*)=1 FROM information_schema.processlist
  4137. WHERE state='Waiting for release of readlock'
  4138. AND info='CREATE TABLE db1.t2(a INT)';
  4139. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  4140. UNLOCK TABLES;
  4141. --echo # Connection con2
  4142. connection con2;
  4143. --echo # Reaping CREATE TABLE db1.t2(a INT)
  4144. --reap
  4145. --echo # Connection default
  4146. connection default;
  4147. FLUSH TABLE WITH READ LOCK;
  4148. --echo # Connection con2
  4149. connection con2;
  4150. # X global lock should block
  4151. --send ALTER DATABASE db1 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8
  4152. --echo # Connection default
  4153. connection default;
  4154. let $wait_condition=SELECT COUNT(*)=1 FROM information_schema.processlist
  4155. WHERE state='Waiting for release of readlock'
  4156. AND info='ALTER DATABASE db1 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8';
  4157. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  4158. UNLOCK TABLES;
  4159. --echo # Connection con2
  4160. connection con2;
  4161. --echo # Reaping ALTER DATABASE db1 DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8
  4162. --reap
  4163. --echo # Connection default
  4164. connection default;
  4165. FLUSH TABLE WITH READ LOCK;
  4166. --echo # Connection con2
  4167. connection con2;
  4168. # S global lock should not block
  4169. FLUSH TABLE WITH READ LOCK;
  4170. UNLOCK TABLES;
  4171. --echo # Connection default
  4172. connection default;
  4173. UNLOCK TABLES;
  4174. DROP DATABASE db1;
  4175. disconnect con2;
  4176. disconnect con3;
  4177. --echo #
  4178. --echo # Bug#56292 Deadlock with ALTER TABLE and MERGE tables
  4179. --echo #
  4180. --disable_warnings
  4181. DROP TABLE IF EXISTS t1, t2, m1;
  4182. --enable_warnings
  4183. CREATE TABLE t1(a INT) engine=MyISAM;
  4184. CREATE TABLE t2(a INT) engine=MyISAM;
  4185. CREATE TABLE m1(a INT) engine=MERGE UNION=(t1, t2);
  4186. INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (1), (2);
  4187. INSERT INTO t2 VALUES (3), (4);
  4188. connect(con1, localhost, root);
  4189. connect(con2, localhost, root);
  4190. --echo # Connection con1
  4191. connection con1;
  4192. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'mdl_upgrade_shared_lock_to_exclusive SIGNAL upgrade WAIT_FOR continue';
  4193. --echo # Sending:
  4194. --send ALTER TABLE m1 engine=MERGE UNION=(t2, t1)
  4195. --echo # Connection con2
  4196. connection con2;
  4197. --echo # Waiting for ALTER TABLE to try lock upgrade
  4198. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now WAIT_FOR upgrade';
  4199. --echo # Sending:
  4200. --send DELETE FROM t2 WHERE a = 3
  4201. --echo # Connection default
  4202. connection default;
  4203. --echo # Check that DELETE is waiting on a metadata lock and not a table lock.
  4204. let $wait_condition=
  4205. SELECT COUNT(*) = 1 FROM information_schema.processlist
  4206. WHERE state = "Waiting for table metadata lock" AND
  4207. info = "DELETE FROM t2 WHERE a = 3";
  4208. --source include/wait_condition.inc
  4209. --echo # Now that DELETE blocks on a metadata lock, we should be able to do
  4210. --echo # SELECT * FROM m1 here. SELECT used to be blocked by a DELETE table
  4211. --echo # lock request.
  4212. SELECT * FROM m1;
  4213. --echo # Resuming ALTER TABLE
  4214. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'now SIGNAL continue';
  4215. --echo # Connection con1
  4216. connection con1;
  4217. --echo # Reaping: ALTER TABLE m1 engine=MERGE UNION=(t2, t1)
  4218. --reap
  4219. --echo # Connection con2
  4220. connection con2;
  4221. --echo # Reaping: DELETE FROM t2 WHERE a = 3
  4222. --reap
  4223. --echo # Connection default
  4224. connection default;
  4225. DROP TABLE m1, t1, t2;
  4226. SET DEBUG_SYNC= 'RESET';
  4227. disconnect con1;
  4228. disconnect con2;
  4229. # Check that all connections opened by test cases in this file are really
  4230. # gone so execution of other tests won't be affected by their presence.
  4231. --source include/wait_until_count_sessions.inc