The problem was that in read only mode (read_only enabled),
the server would mistakenly deny data modification attempts
for temporary tables which belong to a transactional storage
engine (eg. InnoDB).
The solution is to allow transactional temporary tables to be
modified under read only mode. As a whole, the read only mode
does not apply to any kind of temporary table.
------------------------------------------------------------
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.
2617.31.12, 2617.31.15, 2617.31.15, 2617.31.16, 2617.43.1
- initial changeset that introduced the fix for
Bug#989 and follow up fixes for all test suite failures
introduced in the initial changeset.
------------------------------------------------------------
revno: 2617.31.1
committer: Davi Arnaut <Davi.Arnaut@Sun.COM>
branch nick: 4284-6.0
timestamp: Fri 2009-03-06 19:17:00 -0300
message:
Bug#989: If DROP TABLE while there's an active transaction, wrong binlog order
WL#4284: Transactional DDL locking
Currently the MySQL server does not keep metadata locks on
schema objects for the duration of a transaction, thus failing
to guarantee the integrity of the schema objects being used
during the transaction and to protect then from concurrent
DDL operations. This also poses a problem for replication as
a DDL operation might be replicated even thought there are
active transactions using the object being modified.
The solution is to defer the release of metadata locks until
a active transaction is either committed or rolled back. This
prevents other statements from modifying the table for the
entire duration of the transaction. This provides commitment
ordering for guaranteeing serializability across multiple
transactions.
- Incompatible change:
If MySQL's metadata locking system encounters a lock conflict,
the usual schema is to use the try and back-off technique to
avoid deadlocks -- this schema consists in releasing all locks
and trying to acquire them all in one go.
But in a transactional context this algorithm can't be utilized
as its not possible to release locks acquired during the course
of the transaction without breaking the transaction commitments.
To avoid deadlocks in this case, the ER_LOCK_DEADLOCK will be
returned if a lock conflict is encountered during a transaction.
Let's consider an example:
A transaction has two statements that modify table t1, then table
t2, and then commits. The first statement of the transaction will
acquire a shared metadata lock on table t1, and it will be kept
utill COMMIT to ensure serializability.
At the moment when the second statement attempts to acquire a
shared metadata lock on t2, a concurrent ALTER or DROP statement
might have locked t2 exclusively. The prescription of the current
locking protocol is that the acquirer of the shared lock backs off
-- gives up all his current locks and retries. This implies that
the entire multi-statement transaction has to be rolled back.
- Incompatible change:
FLUSH commands such as FLUSH PRIVILEGES and FLUSH TABLES WITH READ
LOCK won't cause locked tables to be implicitly unlocked anymore.
Bug#11733 (COMMITs should not happen if read-only is set)
Bug#22009 (Can write to a read-only server under some circumstances)
See the work log for details
The change consist of
a) acquiring the global read lock in SET GLOBAL READONLY
b) honoring opt_readonly in ha_commit_trans(),
c) honoring opt_readonly in mysql_lock_tables().
a) takes care of the server stability,
b) makes the transactional tables safe (Bug 11733)
c) makes the non transactional tables safe (Bug 22009)
