Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

executor: Fix a panic when using on duplicate update (#31287) #31342

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 7, 2022

Conversation

ti-srebot
Copy link
Contributor

@ti-srebot ti-srebot commented Jan 5, 2022

cherry-pick #31287 to release-5.1
You can switch your code base to this Pull Request by using git-extras:

# In tidb repo:
git pr https://github.com/pingcap/tidb/pull/31342

After apply modifications, you can push your change to this PR via:

git push git@github.com:ti-srebot/tidb.git pr/31342:release-5.1-42e009a53873

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #28078

Problem Summary: When using statements like insert into a select ... from b on duplicate key update a.y = b.y, where b.y is not selected in select ... from b part, sometimes it may panic and reports "slice bounds out of range".

initEvalBuffer4Dup constructs a list of column types (the evalBufferTypes variable), which is expected to match the Schema4OnDuplicate built in function Schema4OnDuplicate. It contains several parts sequentially:

  • columns of already-existed rows
  • extra columns to select (the implicitly required columns in the on duplicate key update clause)
  • columns of new rows to insert

The problem is:

  1. When constructing evalBufferTypes, wrong index is used to find the second part (extra columns to select) . The inner select plan contains both explicitly written columns in select clause (which are columns [:actualColLen]), and the implicitly required columns in the on duplicate key update clause (which are columns [actualColLen:]). In function initEvalBuffer4Dup, the actualColLen is exactly e.rowLen.
  2. Then it creates a buffer for storing values to be inserted. It's expected to match the third part of evalBufferTypes mentioned above. However wrong index is used again and it didn't count the number of extra columns to the offset.

What is changed and how it works?

Fixed the above two mistakes.

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  • No code

Side effects

  • Performance regression: Consumes more CPU
  • Performance regression: Consumes more Memory
  • Breaking backward compatibility

Documentation

  • Affects user behaviors
  • Contains syntax changes
  • Contains variable changes
  • Contains experimental features
  • Changes MySQL compatibility

Release note

Fix a panic that may happen when using `on duplicate key update`.

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

ti-chi-bot commented Jan 5, 2022

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

  • cfzjywxk
  • winoros

To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling /cc @reviewer in the comment.
After your PR has acquired the required number of LGTMs, you can assign this pull request to the committer in the list by filling /assign @committer in the comment to help you merge this pull request.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review.
Reviewer can cancel approval by submitting a request changes review.

@ti-srebot
Copy link
Contributor Author

/run-all-tests

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. labels Jan 5, 2022
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot removed the do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. label Jan 5, 2022
@ti-srebot ti-srebot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. type/5.1-cherry-pick labels Jan 5, 2022
@ti-srebot
Copy link
Contributor Author

@MyonKeminta you're already a collaborator in bot's repo.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Jan 5, 2022
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. and removed status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. labels Jan 5, 2022
@zhouqiang-cl zhouqiang-cl added the cherry-pick-approved Cherry pick PR approved by release team. label Jan 24, 2022
Signed-off-by: ti-srebot <ti-srebot@pingcap.com>
@bb7133
Copy link
Member

bb7133 commented Feb 7, 2022

/merge

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge.

Commit hash: 119cb4d

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Feb 7, 2022
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot merged commit 6a867f7 into pingcap:release-5.1 Feb 7, 2022
@zhouqiang-cl zhouqiang-cl added this to the v5.1.4 milestone Feb 10, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cherry-pick-approved Cherry pick PR approved by release team. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. type/5.1-cherry-pick
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants