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

*: fix staled table cache usage inside a transaction #29443

Merged
merged 27 commits into from
Nov 11, 2021

Conversation

tiancaiamao
Copy link
Contributor

@tiancaiamao tiancaiamao commented Nov 4, 2021

What problem does this PR solve?

Problem Summary:

A subtask of #25293

In session1:

begin;
select * from t;   // use table cache data

then in session2:

insert into t values (xxx);  // change the table cache data
select * from t;           // and reload the cache

in session1:

select * from t;       
// read again, although the cache exist, and cache.Lease > txn.StartTS()
//  it should not use the cache

What is changed and how it works?

  • Add a Start field to table cache, txn TS within [Start, Lease) can use the cache data
  • Store table cache in plan, once the plan is decided, the execute result is decided

begin; sleep(1h)..., then do some write operation, and reload the cache...

In this case, comparing the txn.StartTS() with the [Start, Lease) of the cache will fail, because txn.StartTS() < Start, the cache is not used.

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

None

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

ti-chi-bot commented Nov 4, 2021

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

  • lcwangchao
  • tangenta

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. do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. labels Nov 4, 2021
@tiancaiamao tiancaiamao linked an issue Nov 4, 2021 that may be closed by this pull request
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. labels Nov 10, 2021
@tiancaiamao tiancaiamao changed the title *: support write operation for cached table *: fix staled table cache usage inside a transaction Nov 10, 2021
@tiancaiamao tiancaiamao marked this pull request as ready for review November 10, 2021 04:51
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Nov 10, 2021
table/tables/tables.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
table/tables/cache.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@tiancaiamao
Copy link
Contributor Author

/run-check_dev_2

planner/core/stats.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
table/tables/cache_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Nov 11, 2021
executor/distsql.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
executor/distsql.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
table/table.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@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 Nov 11, 2021
@tangenta
Copy link
Contributor

/merge

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

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

Commit hash: 24ad0dd

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Nov 11, 2021
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

@tiancaiamao: Your PR was out of date, I have automatically updated it for you.

At the same time I will also trigger all tests for you:

/run-all-tests

If the CI test fails, you just re-trigger the test that failed and the bot will merge the PR for you after the CI passes.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot merged commit 2409c83 into pingcap:master Nov 11, 2021
@tiancaiamao tiancaiamao deleted the write-cache branch November 11, 2021 10:36
@tiancaiamao tiancaiamao mentioned this pull request Nov 15, 2021
32 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 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
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Support writing to a cached table
5 participants