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 left join on partition table generate invalid lock key #35732

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 28, 2022

Conversation

tiancaiamao
Copy link
Contributor

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #28073

Problem Summary:

select * from t1 left join t2 ... for update
t2 is partition table.

In the left join case, the physical column id might be 0,
because when a row in t1 but not in t2, NULL will be filled...
and the physical column ID is not set in the row.

It cause the for update generate the invalid lock key with physical ID = 0

What is changed and how it works?

Skip the physical ID = 0 lock key to avoid that case.

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test

By the way, I find something seems wrong:

  • kv storage Scan() API seems don't scan the lock CF... (I'm not sure is it by design? there is also a ScanLock() API used by the GCWorker)

  • We should use 'begin pessimistic' in the test so the lock key is written before the transaction commit. In optimistic txn mode, the lock key is buffered and written until commit... then the test code can't read that lock

  • 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

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

ti-chi-bot commented Jun 24, 2022

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

  • bb7133
  • mjonss

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. do-not-merge/needs-triage-completed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jun 24, 2022
@tiancaiamao tiancaiamao marked this pull request as ready for review June 24, 2022 12:46
@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 Jun 24, 2022
@sre-bot
Copy link
Contributor

sre-bot commented Jun 24, 2022

@tiancaiamao
Copy link
Contributor Author

/run-check_dev_2

@tiancaiamao
Copy link
Contributor Author

/run-check-issue-triage-complete

Copy link
Contributor

@mjonss mjonss left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, with a small question/suggestion (feel free to ignore)

executor/executor.go Show resolved Hide resolved
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Jun 27, 2022
Copy link
Member

@bb7133 bb7133 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@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 Jun 28, 2022
@tiancaiamao
Copy link
Contributor Author

/merge

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

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

Commit hash: 84a75f5

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Jun 28, 2022
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot merged commit 82f0faf into pingcap:master Jun 28, 2022
ti-srebot pushed a commit to ti-srebot/tidb that referenced this pull request Jun 28, 2022
Signed-off-by: ti-srebot <ti-srebot@pingcap.com>
@ti-srebot
Copy link
Contributor

cherry pick to release-6.0 in PR #35773

ti-srebot pushed a commit to ti-srebot/tidb that referenced this pull request Jun 28, 2022
Signed-off-by: ti-srebot <ti-srebot@pingcap.com>
@ti-srebot
Copy link
Contributor

cherry pick to release-6.1 in PR #35774

@tiancaiamao tiancaiamao deleted the issue-28073 branch June 28, 2022 05:27
morgo added a commit to morgo/tidb that referenced this pull request Jun 28, 2022
* upstream/master: (57 commits)
  types: fix incompatible implementation of jsonpath extraction (pingcap#35320)
  planner: fix TRACE PLAN TARGET = 'estimation' panic when meeting partition table (pingcap#35743)
  *: Add `testfork.RunTest` to run multiple tests in one function (pingcap#35746)
  sessionctx/variable: add tests to ensure skipInit can be removed (pingcap#35703)
  helper: request another PD if one of them is unavailable (pingcap#35750)
  metrics: add cached table related metrics to grafana panel (pingcap#34718)
  expression: use cloned RetType at `evaluateExprWithNull` when it may be changed. (pingcap#35759)
  executor: fix left join on partition table generate invalid lock key (pingcap#35732)
  readme: remove adopters (pingcap/docs#8725) (pingcap#35124)
  *: only add default value for final aggregation to fix the aggregate push down (partition) union case (pingcap#35443)
  planner: fix the wrong cost formula of MPPExchanger on cost model ver2 (pingcap#35718)
  sessionctx: support encoding and decoding statement context (pingcap#35688)
  txn: refactor ts acquisition within build and execute phases (pingcap#35376)
  ddl: for schema-level DDL method parameter is now XXXStmt (pingcap#35722)
  *: enable gofmt (pingcap#35721)
  planner: disable collate clause support for enum or set column (pingcap#35684)
  *: Provide a util to "pause" session in uint test (pingcap#35529)
  ddl: implement the core for multi-schema change (pingcap#35429)
  parser: XXXDatabaseStmt now use CIStr for DB name (pingcap#35668)
  *: remove real tikv test on github actions (pingcap#35710)
  ...
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
needs-cherry-pick-release-6.1 Should cherry pick this PR to release-6.1 branch. 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
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Invalid keys may get locked
6 participants