Files
oceanbase/src/storage/memtable/ob_concurrent_control.cpp

169 lines
9.3 KiB
C++

/**
* Copyright (c) 2021 OceanBase
* OceanBase CE is licensed under Mulan PubL v2.
* You can use this software according to the terms and conditions of the Mulan PubL v2.
* You may obtain a copy of Mulan PubL v2 at:
* http://license.coscl.org.cn/MulanPubL-2.0
* THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ON AN "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND,
* EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO NON-INFRINGEMENT,
* MERCHANTABILITY OR FIT FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
* See the Mulan PubL v2 for more details.
*/
#include "storage/memtable/ob_concurrent_control.h"
namespace oceanbase
{
namespace concurrent_control
{
OB_SERIALIZE_MEMBER(ObWriteFlag, flag_);
// Currently, we consider the ability to implement the serial read and write
// capabilities for the single-row using the sequence number. Sequence number
// guarantees the following three principles.
// 1. The read sequence number is equal between all task in this statement.
// 2. The write sequence number is greater than the read sequence number of this
// statement.
// 3. The reader seq no is bigger or equal than the seq no of the last
// statement.
//
// With the above principles, we can prevent the concurrent operations of
// writing to the same data row in the same statement. That is, during writing
// to a mvcc row, we will check whether there is a data with the same txn id
// providing the lock semantic. And if its write sequence number is greater than
// or equal to the read sequence number of the current write operation, there
// may be a conflict.
//
// NB: Currently, there may be some cases that the txn sequentially increases
// the sequence number of the same row in the same task. And after paying great
// effort to sort out these posibilities(listed in the following cases), new
// possibility should be added carefully and remind the owner of the code.
int check_sequence_set_violation(const concurrent_control::ObWriteFlag write_flag,
const transaction::ObTxSEQ reader_seq_no,
const transaction::ObTransID writer_tx_id,
const blocksstable::ObDmlFlag writer_dml_flag,
const transaction::ObTxSEQ writer_seq_no,
const transaction::ObTransID locker_tx_id,
const blocksstable::ObDmlFlag locker_dml_flag,
const transaction::ObTxSEQ locker_seq_no)
{
int ret = OB_SUCCESS;
// TODO(handora.qc): add flag to carefully screen out the different cases. For
// example, add the lob flag for the case 2.1 to prevent the other scenes from
// happening.
if (writer_tx_id == locker_tx_id) {
// For statements during sql and threads during PDML, the following rules is
// guaranteed:
// 1. reader seq no is bigger or equal than the seq no of the last statements
if (reader_seq_no < locker_seq_no) {
// Case 1: It may happens that two pdml unique index tasks insert the same
// row concurrently, so we report duplicate key under the case to prevent
// the insertion.
if (blocksstable::ObDmlFlag::DF_INSERT == writer_dml_flag
&& blocksstable::ObDmlFlag::DF_INSERT == locker_dml_flag) {
ret = OB_ERR_PRIMARY_KEY_DUPLICATE;
TRANS_LOG(WARN, "pdml duplicate primary key found", K(ret),
K(writer_tx_id), K(writer_dml_flag), K(writer_seq_no),
K(locker_tx_id), K(locker_dml_flag), K(locker_seq_no));
// Case 2.1: For the case of the update in the storage layer, it may be
// split into lock and update in a single statement and fail the check, so
// we need bypass this case(Currently only the update of the lob will cause
// it). We use the common idea that all operations split in the storage
// layer will use same sequence number, so we bypass the check if the writer
// sequence number is equal to the locker sequence number.
// } else if (writer_seq_no == locker_seq_no &&
// (blocksstable::ObDmlFlag::DF_UPDATE == writer_dml_flag
// && blocksstable::ObDmlFlag::DF_LOCK == locker_dml_flag)) {
//
// Case 2.2: For the case of the self reference of the foreign key, it may
// be split into lock and insert/update in a single statement, so we need
// bypass this case(TODO(handora.qc): remove the requirement after yichang's
// modification).
} else if (blocksstable::ObDmlFlag::DF_LOCK == locker_dml_flag) {
// bypass the case
// Case 3: For the case of the update of the primary key in the sql layer,
// it will be split into a delete of the old rowkey and an insert for the
// new one which will fail to pass the check. And the two operations may
// even be split into two sequentially ordered steps to follow the sql-layer
// semantics, so we need bypass this case.
} else if (blocksstable::ObDmlFlag::DF_INSERT == writer_dml_flag
&& blocksstable::ObDmlFlag::DF_DELETE == locker_dml_flag) {
// bypass the case
// Case 4: For the case of the insert of two same rowkeys with insert onto
// duplicate, it will be split into a insert of the rowkey and an update or
// delete of the same one which will fail to pass the check. And the two
// operations is split into two sequentially ordered steps so we need bypass
// this case.
} else if ((blocksstable::ObDmlFlag::DF_UPDATE == writer_dml_flag
|| blocksstable::ObDmlFlag::DF_DELETE == writer_dml_flag)
&& blocksstable::ObDmlFlag::DF_INSERT == locker_dml_flag) {
// bypass the case
// Case 5: For the case of table api, it inserts rows under the same stmt,
// and so fail to pass the check. We must bypass the case.
} else if (write_flag.is_table_api()) {
// bypass the case
// Case 6: For the case of deleting rows during building the unique index
// concurrently, it may exist that two rows of the main table point to one
// row of the newly created index, which means the unique index will abort
// itself during consistency check. While because of the feature of the
// online ddl, the concurrent delete will start to operate on the newly
// created index, which causes these two delete operations and fail to pass
// the check. So we need bypass this case.
} else if (blocksstable::ObDmlFlag::DF_DELETE == writer_dml_flag
&& blocksstable::ObDmlFlag::DF_DELETE == locker_dml_flag) {
// bypass the case
// Case 7: For the case of batch dml operation, it may operate the same row
// concurrently if the first operation has no effects.(SQL layer will check
// the modification of the row before the second operation, and report the
// error if the row has been modified while the first row may have no effect
// and the parallel insert may happen). So we need report the batched stmt
// warning according to this case.
} else if (write_flag.is_dml_batch_opt()) {
ret = OB_BATCHED_MULTI_STMT_ROLLBACK;
TRANS_LOG(WARN, "batch multi stmt rollback found", K(ret),
K(writer_tx_id), K(writer_dml_flag), K(writer_seq_no),
K(locker_tx_id), K(locker_dml_flag), K(locker_seq_no));
// Case 8: For the case of on duplicate key update, it may operate the
// same row more than once if the sql insert onto duplicate with the
// same row more than once. It may have no chance to batch the same row.
// So we need bypass this case.
} else if (write_flag.is_insert_up()) {
// bypass the case
// Case 9: For the case of the write only index, it may operate the same
// row more than once under the case that main table has two rows pointing
// to the same index which is building during the first stage(in which
// stage update and insert should consider index while the index is not
// readable). In the case, an update may update the same row on the index.
// So we need report the batched stmt warning according to this case.
} else if (write_flag.is_write_only_index()) {
ret = OB_ERR_PRIMARY_KEY_DUPLICATE;
TRANS_LOG(WARN, "write only index insert/update on the same row", K(ret),
K(writer_tx_id), K(writer_dml_flag), K(writer_seq_no),
K(locker_tx_id), K(locker_dml_flag), K(locker_seq_no));
} else {
// Others: It will never happen that two operaions on the same row for the
// same txn except the above cases. So we should report unexpected error.
ret = OB_ERR_UNEXPECTED;
TRANS_LOG(ERROR, "multiple modification on one row found", K(reader_seq_no),
K(writer_tx_id), K(writer_dml_flag), K(writer_seq_no),
K(locker_tx_id), K(locker_dml_flag), K(locker_seq_no));
}
}
if (OB_SUCC(ret) && writer_seq_no < locker_seq_no) {
// We need guarantee the right sequence of the same txn operations
ret = OB_ERR_UNEXPECTED;
TRANS_LOG(ERROR, "wrong row of sequence on one row found", K(reader_seq_no),
K(writer_tx_id), K(writer_dml_flag), K(writer_seq_no),
K(locker_tx_id), K(locker_dml_flag), K(locker_seq_no));
}
}
return ret;
}
} // namespace concurrent_control
} // namespace oceanbase