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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

executor,session: reimplement lock->put by SetLockedKeyValue #42642

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 28, 2023
Merged

executor,session: reimplement lock->put by SetLockedKeyValue #42642

merged 3 commits into from
Mar 28, 2023

Conversation

zyguan
Copy link
Contributor

@zyguan zyguan commented Mar 28, 2023

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: ref #28011

Problem Summary: as described in #28011 , kv pairs converted from locks is visible to union-scan, which leads to duplicated rows (one from snapshot and the other from mem-index-reader).

What is changed and how it works?

Instead of writing membuf directly, cache locked key-value pairs that might be converted to PUT separately, and merge them on commit.

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

Please refer to Release Notes Language Style Guide to write a quality release note.

None

@zyguan
executor,session: reimplement lock->put by SetLockedKeyValue
6e38991 
Signed-off-by: zyguan <zhongyangguan@gmail.com>
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

ti-chi-bot commented Mar 28, 2023 •
edited
Loading

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

  • cfzjywxk
  • ekexium

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-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 28, 2023
@zyguan zyguan requested review from cfzjywxk and ekexium March 28, 2023 08:49
ekexium
ekexium reviewed Mar 28, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@ekexium ekexium left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The return value is never used?

@zyguan
fix check-dev
bea40d6 
Signed-off-by: zyguan <zhongyangguan@gmail.com>
@zyguan
Copy link
Contributor Author

zyguan commented Mar 28, 2023

The return values is never used?

Do you mean the return of LazyTxn.ChangeLockIntoPut? Yes, it's unused by now.

@zyguan
update the comment of ChangeLockIntoPut
e33891f 
Signed-off-by: zyguan <zhongyangguan@gmail.com>
cfzjywxk
cfzjywxk reviewed Mar 28, 2023
View reviewed changes
tests/realtikvtest/pessimistictest/pessimistic_test.go
@@ -2913,6 +2913,40 @@ func TestChangeLockToPut(t *testing.T) {
tk.MustExec("admin check table t1")
}

func TestIssue28011(t *testing.T) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We don't have a test to cover the effect of changing, maybe it's needed to tested by hand.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Mar 28, 2023
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot removed the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Mar 28, 2023
@ekexium
Copy link
Contributor

ekexium commented Mar 28, 2023

/merge

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. label Mar 28, 2023
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

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

Commit hash: e33891f

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Mar 28, 2023
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot merged commit 0c7e204 into pingcap:release-6.1-20230328-v6.1.1 Mar 28, 2023
zyguan added a commit to ti-chi-bot/tidb that referenced this pull request Mar 29, 2023
@zyguan
executor,session: reimplement lock->put by SetLockedKeyValue (pingc…
483ffd9 
…ap#42642)

ref pingcap#28011

Signed-off-by: zyguan <zhongyangguan@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@cfzjywxk cfzjywxk cfzjywxk approved these changes

@ekexium ekexium ekexium approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. 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.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@zyguan @ti-chi-bot @ekexium @cfzjywxk