- 02 Nov, 2021 9 commits
-
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
Jan Lindström authored
* Fix error handling NULL-pointer reference * Add mtr-suppression on galera_ssl_upgrade
-
Jan Lindström authored
* Fix error handling NULL-pointer reference * Add mtr-suppression on galera_ssl_upgrade
-
Jan Lindström authored
* Fix error handling NULL-pointer reference * Add mtr-suppression on galera_ssl_upgrade
-
- 01 Nov, 2021 1 commit
-
-
Jan Lindström authored
* Fix error handling NULL-pointer reference * Add mtr-suppression on galera_ssl_upgrade
-
- 30 Oct, 2021 1 commit
-
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
- 29 Oct, 2021 12 commits
-
-
sjaakola authored
Mutex order violation when wsrep bf thread kills a conflicting trx, the stack is wsrep_thd_LOCK() wsrep_kill_victim() lock_rec_other_has_conflicting() lock_clust_rec_read_check_and_lock() row_search_mvcc() ha_innobase::index_read() ha_innobase::rnd_pos() handler::ha_rnd_pos() handler::rnd_pos_by_record() handler::ha_rnd_pos_by_record() Rows_log_event::find_row() Update_rows_log_event::do_exec_row() Rows_log_event::do_apply_event() Log_event::apply_event() wsrep_apply_events() and mutexes are taken in the order lock_sys->mutex -> victim_trx->mutex -> victim_thread->LOCK_thd_data When a normal KILL statement is executed, the stack is innobase_kill_query() kill_handlerton() plugin_foreach_with_mask() ha_kill_query() THD::awake() kill_one_thread() and mutexes are victim_thread->LOCK_thd_data -> lock_sys->mutex -> victim_trx->mutex This patch is the plan D variant for fixing potetial mutex locking order exercised by BF aborting and KILL command execution. In this approach, KILL command is replicated as TOI operation. This guarantees total isolation for the KILL command execution in the first node: there is no concurrent replication applying and no concurrent DDL executing. Therefore there is no risk of BF aborting to happen in parallel with KILL command execution either. Potential mutex deadlocks between the different mutex access paths with KILL command execution and BF aborting cannot therefore happen. TOI replication is used, in this approach, purely as means to provide isolated KILL command execution in the first node. KILL command should not (and must not) be applied in secondary nodes. In this patch, we make this sure by skipping KILL execution in secondary nodes, in applying phase, where we bail out if applier thread is trying to execute KILL command. This is effective, but skipping the applying of KILL command could happen much earlier as well. This also fixed unprotected calls to wsrep_thd_abort that will use wsrep_abort_transaction. This is fixed by holding THD::LOCK_thd_data while we abort transaction. Reviewed-by: Jan Lindström <jan.lindstrom@mariadb.com>
-
Jan Lindström authored
Revert "MDEV-23328 Server hang due to Galera lock conflict resolution" This reverts commit eac8341d.
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
sjaakola authored
Mutex order violation when wsrep bf thread kills a conflicting trx, the stack is wsrep_thd_LOCK() wsrep_kill_victim() lock_rec_other_has_conflicting() lock_clust_rec_read_check_and_lock() row_search_mvcc() ha_innobase::index_read() ha_innobase::rnd_pos() handler::ha_rnd_pos() handler::rnd_pos_by_record() handler::ha_rnd_pos_by_record() Rows_log_event::find_row() Update_rows_log_event::do_exec_row() Rows_log_event::do_apply_event() Log_event::apply_event() wsrep_apply_events() and mutexes are taken in the order lock_sys->mutex -> victim_trx->mutex -> victim_thread->LOCK_thd_data When a normal KILL statement is executed, the stack is innobase_kill_query() kill_handlerton() plugin_foreach_with_mask() ha_kill_query() THD::awake() kill_one_thread() and mutexes are victim_thread->LOCK_thd_data -> lock_sys->mutex -> victim_trx->mutex This patch is the plan D variant for fixing potetial mutex locking order exercised by BF aborting and KILL command execution. In this approach, KILL command is replicated as TOI operation. This guarantees total isolation for the KILL command execution in the first node: there is no concurrent replication applying and no concurrent DDL executing. Therefore there is no risk of BF aborting to happen in parallel with KILL command execution either. Potential mutex deadlocks between the different mutex access paths with KILL command execution and BF aborting cannot therefore happen. TOI replication is used, in this approach, purely as means to provide isolated KILL command execution in the first node. KILL command should not (and must not) be applied in secondary nodes. In this patch, we make this sure by skipping KILL execution in secondary nodes, in applying phase, where we bail out if applier thread is trying to execute KILL command. This is effective, but skipping the applying of KILL command could happen much earlier as well. This also fixed unprotected calls to wsrep_thd_abort that will use wsrep_abort_transaction. This is fixed by holding THD::LOCK_thd_data while we abort transaction. Reviewed-by: Jan Lindström <jan.lindstrom@mariadb.com>
-
Jan Lindström authored
Revert "MDEV-23328 Server hang due to Galera lock conflict resolution" This reverts commit 29bbcac0.
-
sjaakola authored
Mutex order violation when wsrep bf thread kills a conflicting trx, the stack is wsrep_thd_LOCK() wsrep_kill_victim() lock_rec_other_has_conflicting() lock_clust_rec_read_check_and_lock() row_search_mvcc() ha_innobase::index_read() ha_innobase::rnd_pos() handler::ha_rnd_pos() handler::rnd_pos_by_record() handler::ha_rnd_pos_by_record() Rows_log_event::find_row() Update_rows_log_event::do_exec_row() Rows_log_event::do_apply_event() Log_event::apply_event() wsrep_apply_events() and mutexes are taken in the order lock_sys->mutex -> victim_trx->mutex -> victim_thread->LOCK_thd_data When a normal KILL statement is executed, the stack is innobase_kill_query() kill_handlerton() plugin_foreach_with_mask() ha_kill_query() THD::awake() kill_one_thread() and mutexes are victim_thread->LOCK_thd_data -> lock_sys->mutex -> victim_trx->mutex This patch is the plan D variant for fixing potetial mutex locking order exercised by BF aborting and KILL command execution. In this approach, KILL command is replicated as TOI operation. This guarantees total isolation for the KILL command execution in the first node: there is no concurrent replication applying and no concurrent DDL executing. Therefore there is no risk of BF aborting to happen in parallel with KILL command execution either. Potential mutex deadlocks between the different mutex access paths with KILL command execution and BF aborting cannot therefore happen. TOI replication is used, in this approach, purely as means to provide isolated KILL command execution in the first node. KILL command should not (and must not) be applied in secondary nodes. In this patch, we make this sure by skipping KILL execution in secondary nodes, in applying phase, where we bail out if applier thread is trying to execute KILL command. This is effective, but skipping the applying of KILL command could happen much earlier as well. This also fixed unprotected calls to wsrep_thd_abort that will use wsrep_abort_transaction. This is fixed by holding THD::LOCK_thd_data while we abort transaction. Reviewed-by: Jan Lindström <jan.lindstrom@mariadb.com>
-
Jan Lindström authored
Revert "MDEV-23328 Server hang due to Galera lock conflict resolution" This reverts commit eac8341d.
-
sjaakola authored
Mutex order violation when wsrep bf thread kills a conflicting trx, the stack is wsrep_thd_LOCK() wsrep_kill_victim() lock_rec_other_has_conflicting() lock_clust_rec_read_check_and_lock() row_search_mvcc() ha_innobase::index_read() ha_innobase::rnd_pos() handler::ha_rnd_pos() handler::rnd_pos_by_record() handler::ha_rnd_pos_by_record() Rows_log_event::find_row() Update_rows_log_event::do_exec_row() Rows_log_event::do_apply_event() Log_event::apply_event() wsrep_apply_events() and mutexes are taken in the order lock_sys->mutex -> victim_trx->mutex -> victim_thread->LOCK_thd_data When a normal KILL statement is executed, the stack is innobase_kill_query() kill_handlerton() plugin_foreach_with_mask() ha_kill_query() THD::awake() kill_one_thread() and mutexes are victim_thread->LOCK_thd_data -> lock_sys->mutex -> victim_trx->mutex This patch is the plan D variant for fixing potetial mutex locking order exercised by BF aborting and KILL command execution. In this approach, KILL command is replicated as TOI operation. This guarantees total isolation for the KILL command execution in the first node: there is no concurrent replication applying and no concurrent DDL executing. Therefore there is no risk of BF aborting to happen in parallel with KILL command execution either. Potential mutex deadlocks between the different mutex access paths with KILL command execution and BF aborting cannot therefore happen. TOI replication is used, in this approach, purely as means to provide isolated KILL command execution in the first node. KILL command should not (and must not) be applied in secondary nodes. In this patch, we make this sure by skipping KILL execution in secondary nodes, in applying phase, where we bail out if applier thread is trying to execute KILL command. This is effective, but skipping the applying of KILL command could happen much earlier as well. This also fixed unprotected calls to wsrep_thd_abort that will use wsrep_abort_transaction. This is fixed by holding THD::LOCK_thd_data while we abort transaction. Reviewed-by: Jan Lindström <jan.lindstrom@mariadb.com>
-
Jan Lindström authored
Revert "MDEV-23328 Server hang due to Galera lock conflict resolution" This reverts commit 29bbcac0.
-
- 28 Oct, 2021 13 commits
-
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
Sergei Golubchik authored
for example: sql/sql_prepare.cc:5714:63: error: 'static void Ed_result_set::operator delete(void*, MEM_ROOT*)' called on pointer returned from a mismatched allocation function [-Werror=mismatched-new-delete]
-
Oleksandr Byelkin authored
-
Vladislav Vaintroub authored
Those messages don't indicate errors, they should be normal warnings.
-
Marko Mäkelä authored
-
Marko Mäkelä authored
-
Marko Mäkelä authored
-
Marko Mäkelä authored
The InnoDB changes in MySQL 5.7.36 that were applicable to MariaDB were covered by MDEV-26864, MDEV-26865, MDEV-26866.
-
Nikita Malyavin authored
The initial test case for MySQL Bug #33053297 is based on mysql/mysql-server@27130e25078864b010d81266f9613d389d4a229b. innobase_get_field_from_update_vector is not a suitable function to fetch updated row info, as well as parent table's update vector is not always suitable. For instance, in case of DELETE it contains undefined data. castade->update vector seems to be good enough to fetch all base columns update data, and besides faster, and less error-prone.
-
Julius Goryavsky authored
In the replication-related code, in the exec_relay_log_event() (slave.cc) function, where the "data_lock" mutex is captured, this mutex is then not released on one of the early return branches within a specific insert for WSREP, namely under the branch: "if (wsrep_before_statement(thd))". As a result, the mutex remains captured, resulting in errors or hangs. This commit fixes this issue, which is now showing up as intermittent failures in mtr tests for galera and galera_sr suites.
-
- 27 Oct, 2021 4 commits
-
-
Marko Mäkelä authored
-
Marko Mäkelä authored
-
Sergei Petrunia authored
ha_rocksdb.h:459:15: warning: 'table_type' overrides a member function but is not marked 'override' [-Winconsistent-missing-override]
-
Alexander Barkov authored
The assert inside String::copy() prevents copying from from "str" if its own String::Ptr also points to the same memory. The idea of the assert is that copy() performs memory reallocation, and this reallocation can free (and thus invalidate) the memory pointed by Ptr, which can lead to further copying from a freed memory. The assert was incomplete: copy() can free the memory pointed by its Ptr only if String::alloced is true! If the String is not alloced, it is still safe to copy even from the location pointed by Ptr. This scenario demonstrates a safe copy(): const char *tmp= "123"; String str1(tmp, 3); String str2(tmp, 3); // This statement is safe: str2.copy(str1->ptr(), str1->length(), str1->charset(), cs_to, &errors); Inside the copy() the parameter "str" is equal to String::Ptr in this example. But it's still ok to reallocate the memory for str2, because str2 was a constant before the copy() call. Thus reallocation does not make the memory pointed by str1->ptr() invalid. Adjusting the assert condition to allow copying for constant strings.
-