rdelaage
/
postgresql
mirror of https://git.postgresql.org/git/postgresql.git
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Fix concurrent locking of tuple update chain 

If several sessions are concurrently locking a tuple update chain with
nonconflicting lock modes using an old snapshot, and they all succeed,
it may happen that some of them fail because of restarting the loop (due
to a concurrent Xmax change) and getting an error in the subsequent pass
while trying to obtain a tuple lock that they already have in some tuple
version.

This can only happen with very high concurrency (where a row is being
both updated and FK-checked by multiple transactions concurrently), but
it's been observed in the field and can have unpleasant consequences
such as an FK check failing to see a tuple that definitely exists:
    ERROR:  insert or update on table "child_table" violates foreign key constraint "fk_constraint_name"
    DETAIL:  Key (keyid)=(123456) is not present in table "parent_table".
(where the key is observably present in the table).

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170714210011.r25mrff4nxjhmf3g@alvherre.pgsql
This commit is contained in:
Alvaro Herrera 2017-07-26 17:24:16 -04:00
parent c28e4f4dc6
commit 459c64d322
1 changed files with 37 additions and 4 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

41
src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c
View File

@ -5524,8 +5524,10 @@ l5:
* with the given xid, does the current transaction need to wait, fail, or can
* it continue if it wanted to acquire a lock of the given mode? "needwait"
* is set to true if waiting is necessary; if it can continue, then
* HeapTupleMayBeUpdated is returned. In case of a conflict, a different
* HeapTupleSatisfiesUpdate return code is returned.
* HeapTupleMayBeUpdated is returned. If the lock is already held by the
* current transaction, return HeapTupleSelfUpdated. In case of a conflict
* with another transaction, a different HeapTupleSatisfiesUpdate return code
* is returned.
*
* The held status is said to be hypothetical because it might correspond to a
* lock held by a single Xid, i.e. not a real MultiXactId; we express it this
@ -5548,8 +5550,9 @@ test_lockmode_for_conflict(MultiXactStatus status, TransactionId xid,
if (TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId(xid))
{
/*
* Updated by our own transaction? Just return failure. This
* shouldn't normally happen.
* The tuple has already been locked by our own transaction. This is
* very rare but can happen if multiple transactions are trying to
* lock an ancient version of the same tuple.
*/
return HeapTupleSelfUpdated;
}
@ -5748,6 +5751,22 @@ l4:
members[i].xid,
mode, &needwait);
/*
* If the tuple was already locked by ourselves in a
* previous iteration of this (say heap_lock_tuple was
* forced to restart the locking loop because of a change
* in xmax), then we hold the lock already on this tuple
* version and we don't need to do anything; and this is
* not an error condition either. We just need to skip
* this tuple and continue locking the next version in the
* update chain.
*/
if (result == HeapTupleSelfUpdated)
{
pfree(members);
goto next;
}
if (needwait)
{
LockBuffer(buf, BUFFER_LOCK_UNLOCK);
@ -5808,6 +5827,19 @@ l4:
result = test_lockmode_for_conflict(status, rawxmax, mode,
&needwait);
/*
* If the tuple was already locked by ourselves in a previous
* iteration of this (say heap_lock_tuple was forced to
* restart the locking loop because of a change in xmax), then
* we hold the lock already on this tuple version and we don't
* need to do anything; and this is not an error condition
* either. We just need to skip this tuple and continue
* locking the next version in the update chain.
*/
if (result == HeapTupleSelfUpdated)
goto next;
if (needwait)
{
LockBuffer(buf, BUFFER_LOCK_UNLOCK);
@ -5868,6 +5900,7 @@ l4:
END_CRIT_SECTION();
next:
/* if we find the end of update chain, we're done. */
if (mytup.t_data->t_infomask & HEAP_XMAX_INVALID ||
ItemPointerEquals(&mytup.t_self, &mytup.t_data->t_ctid) ||