From: Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org> To: Serge Petrenko <sergepetrenko@tarantool.org>, gorcunov@gmail.com Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 3/7] applier: extract plain tx application from applier_apply_tx() Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 21:47:17 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <2e081c11-ed0c-506a-af8a-57ef6707f7a9@tarantool.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <b27076fa5d648a7bb40041dc3976ad1e63cdfb0c.1616588119.git.sergepetrenko@tarantool.org> Thanks for the patch! See 4 comments below. On 24.03.2021 13:24, Serge Petrenko wrote: > The new routine, called apply_plain_tx(), may be used not only by > applier_apply_tx(), but also by final join, once we make it > transactional, and recovery, once it's also turned transactional. > > Also, while we're at it. Remove excess fiber_gc() call from > applier_subscribe loop. Let's better make sure fiber_gc() is called on > any return from applier_apply_tx(). > > Prerequisite #5874 > Part of #5566 > --- > src/box/applier.cc | 188 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- > 1 file changed, 93 insertions(+), 95 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/box/applier.cc b/src/box/applier.cc > index 65afa5e98..07e557a51 100644 > --- a/src/box/applier.cc > +++ b/src/box/applier.cc > @@ -905,6 +905,90 @@ applier_handle_raft(struct applier *applier, struct xrow_header *row) > return box_raft_process(&req, applier->instance_id); > } > > +static inline int > +apply_plain_tx(struct stailq *rows, bool skip_conflict, bool use_triggers) > +{ > + /** 1. Inside of functions for comment first line we use /*, not /**. > + * Explicitly begin the transaction so that we can > + * control fiber->gc life cycle and, in case of apply > + * conflict safely access failed xrow object and allocate > + * IPROTO_NOP on gc. > + */ > + struct txn *txn = txn_begin(); > + struct applier_tx_row *item; > + if (txn == NULL) > + return -1; > + > + stailq_foreach_entry(item, rows, next) { > + struct xrow_header *row = &item->row; > + int res = apply_row(row); > + if (res != 0 && skip_conflict) { > + struct error *e = diag_last_error(diag_get()); > + /* > + * In case of ER_TUPLE_FOUND error and enabled > + * replication_skip_conflict configuration > + * option, skip applying the foreign row and > + * replace it with NOP in the local write ahead > + * log. > + */ > + if (e->type == &type_ClientError && > + box_error_code(e) == ER_TUPLE_FOUND && > + replication_skip_conflict) { 2. That looks kind of confusing - you pass skip_conflict option but also use replication_skip_conflict. You could calculate skip_conflict based on replication_skip_conflict in your patch. > + diag_clear(diag_get()); > + row->type = IPROTO_NOP; > + row->bodycnt = 0; > + res = apply_row(row); > + } > + } > + if (res != 0) > + goto fail; > + } > + > + /* > + * We are going to commit so it's a high time to check if > + * the current transaction has non-local effects. > + */ > + if (txn_is_distributed(txn)) { > + /* > + * A transaction mixes remote and local rows. > + * Local rows must be replicated back, which > + * doesn't make sense since the master likely has > + * new changes which local rows may overwrite. > + * Raise an error. > + */ > + diag_set(ClientError, ER_UNSUPPORTED, "Replication", > + "distributed transactions"); > + goto fail; > + } > + > + if (use_triggers) { > + /* We are ready to submit txn to wal. */ > + struct trigger *on_rollback, *on_wal_write; > + size_t size; > + on_rollback = region_alloc_object(&txn->region, typeof(*on_rollback), > + &size); > + on_wal_write = region_alloc_object(&txn->region, typeof(*on_wal_write), > + &size); > + if (on_rollback == NULL || on_wal_write == NULL) { > + diag_set(OutOfMemory, size, "region_alloc_object", > + "on_rollback/on_wal_write"); > + goto fail; > + } > + > + trigger_create(on_rollback, applier_txn_rollback_cb, NULL, NULL); > + txn_on_rollback(txn, on_rollback); > + > + trigger_create(on_wal_write, applier_txn_wal_write_cb, NULL, NULL); > + txn_on_wal_write(txn, on_wal_write); > + } > + > + return txn_commit_try_async(txn); > +fail: > + txn_rollback(txn); > + return -1; > +} > @@ -974,103 +1058,18 @@ applier_apply_tx(struct applier *applier, struct stailq *rows) > assert(first_row == last_row); > if (apply_synchro_row(first_row) != 0) > diag_raise(); 3. Hm. Isn't it a bug that we raise an error here, but don't unlock the latch and don't call fiber_gc()? Looks like a separate bug. Could you fix it please, and probably with a test? Can it be related to the hang you fix in the previous commit? > - goto success; > - } > - > - /** > - * Explicitly begin the transaction so that we can > - * control fiber->gc life cycle and, in case of apply > - * conflict safely access failed xrow object and allocate > - * IPROTO_NOP on gc. > - */ > - struct txn *txn; > - txn = txn_begin(); > - struct applier_tx_row *item; > - if (txn == NULL) { > - latch_unlock(latch); > - return -1; > - } > - stailq_foreach_entry(item, rows, next) { > - struct xrow_header *row = &item->row; > - int res = apply_row(row); > - if (res != 0) { > - struct error *e = diag_last_error(diag_get()); > - /* > - * In case of ER_TUPLE_FOUND error and enabled > - * replication_skip_conflict configuration > - * option, skip applying the foreign row and > - * replace it with NOP in the local write ahead > - * log. > - */ > - if (e->type == &type_ClientError && > - box_error_code(e) == ER_TUPLE_FOUND && > - replication_skip_conflict) { > - diag_clear(diag_get()); > - row->type = IPROTO_NOP; > - row->bodycnt = 0; > - res = apply_row(row); > - } > - } > - if (res != 0) > - goto rollback; > - } > - /* > - * We are going to commit so it's a high time to check if > - * the current transaction has non-local effects. > - */ > - if (txn_is_distributed(txn)) { > - /* > - * A transaction mixes remote and local rows. > - * Local rows must be replicated back, which > - * doesn't make sense since the master likely has > - * new changes which local rows may overwrite. > - * Raise an error. > - */ > - diag_set(ClientError, ER_UNSUPPORTED, > - "Replication", "distributed transactions"); > - goto rollback; > + goto written; > } > > - /* We are ready to submit txn to wal. */ > - struct trigger *on_rollback, *on_wal_write; > - size_t size; > - on_rollback = region_alloc_object(&txn->region, typeof(*on_rollback), > - &size); > - on_wal_write = region_alloc_object(&txn->region, typeof(*on_wal_write), > - &size); > - if (on_rollback == NULL || on_wal_write == NULL) { > - diag_set(OutOfMemory, size, "region_alloc_object", > - "on_rollback/on_wal_write"); > - goto rollback; > + if ((rc = apply_plain_tx(rows, true, true)) == 0) { > +written: > + vclock_follow(&replicaset.applier.vclock, last_row->replica_id, > + last_row->lsn); > } > - > - trigger_create(on_rollback, applier_txn_rollback_cb, NULL, NULL); > - txn_on_rollback(txn, on_rollback); > - > - trigger_create(on_wal_write, applier_txn_wal_write_cb, NULL, NULL); > - txn_on_wal_write(txn, on_wal_write); > - > - if (txn_commit_try_async(txn) < 0) > - goto fail; > - > -success: > - /* > - * The transaction was sent to journal so promote vclock. > - * > - * Use the lsn of the last row to guard from 1.10 > - * instances, which send every single tx row as a separate > - * transaction. > - */ > - vclock_follow(&replicaset.applier.vclock, last_row->replica_id, > - last_row->lsn); > - latch_unlock(latch); > - return 0; > -rollback: > - txn_rollback(txn); > -fail: > +no_write: 4. You go to this label even when write was done. Maybe rename to 'end' or 'finish'? Consider this diff: ==================== @@ -1027,7 +1027,7 @@ applier_apply_tx(struct applier *applier, struct stailq *rows) latch_lock(latch); if (vclock_get(&replicaset.applier.vclock, last_row->replica_id) >= last_row->lsn) { - goto no_write; + goto finish; } else if (vclock_get(&replicaset.applier.vclock, first_row->replica_id) >= first_row->lsn) { /* @@ -1058,15 +1058,12 @@ applier_apply_tx(struct applier *applier, struct stailq *rows) assert(first_row == last_row); if (apply_synchro_row(first_row) != 0) diag_raise(); - goto written; + } else if ((rc = apply_plain_tx(rows, true, true)) != 0) { + goto finish; } - - if ((rc = apply_plain_tx(rows, true, true)) == 0) { -written: - vclock_follow(&replicaset.applier.vclock, last_row->replica_id, - last_row->lsn); - } -no_write: + vclock_follow(&replicaset.applier.vclock, last_row->replica_id, + last_row->lsn); +finish: latch_unlock(latch); fiber_gc(); return rc; ==================== > latch_unlock(latch); > fiber_gc(); > - return -1; > + return rc; > }
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-26 20:47 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-03-24 12:24 [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 0/7] applier: handle synchronous transactions during final Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-24 12:24 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 1/7] replication: fix a hang on final join retry Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-26 20:44 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-27 16:52 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-29 21:50 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-24 12:24 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 2/7] applier: extract tx boundary checks from applier_read_tx into a separate routine Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-26 12:35 ` Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-27 16:54 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-24 12:24 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 3/7] applier: extract plain tx application from applier_apply_tx() Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-26 20:47 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches [this message] 2021-03-27 17:34 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-27 18:30 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 3.5/7] applier: fix not releasing the latch on apply_synchro_row() fail Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-29 21:50 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-30 8:15 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-24 12:24 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 4/7] applier: remove excess last_row_time update from subscribe loop Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-24 12:24 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 5/7] applier: make final join transactional Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-26 20:49 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-27 19:05 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-29 21:51 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-30 8:15 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-24 12:24 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 6/7] replication: tolerate synchro rollback during final join Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-24 12:45 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-26 20:49 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-27 19:23 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-24 12:24 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 7/7] replication: do not ignore replica vclock on register Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-26 20:50 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-27 20:13 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-29 21:51 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-30 8:16 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-30 12:33 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-26 13:46 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 0/7] applier: handle synchronous transactions during final Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches 2021-03-30 20:13 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches 2021-04-05 16:15 ` Kirill Yukhin via Tarantool-patches
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=2e081c11-ed0c-506a-af8a-57ef6707f7a9@tarantool.org \ --to=tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org \ --cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \ --cc=sergepetrenko@tarantool.org \ --cc=v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org \ --subject='Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 3/7] applier: extract plain tx application from applier_apply_tx()' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox