Tarantool development patches archive
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
To: Serge Petrenko <sergepetrenko@tarantool.org>
Cc: Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>,
	tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 1/1] applier: process synchro rows after WAL write
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 13:46:48 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YG7fGGs2WbV8ap16@grain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <72609da5-e79f-dd29-c69e-77090ea06df2@tarantool.org>

On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 01:32:06PM +0300, Serge Petrenko wrote:
> > Serge, you mean the scenario when some instances in replicaset
> > have the patch applied and some are not?
> 
> No. Let's suppose everyone has this patch applied.
> Now look at one particular instance. It may happen that while one of
> its appliers is writing this synchro row (either CONFIRM or ROLLBACK,
> doesn't matter), some other applier may still apply requests coming
> from other replicaset members.

Ah, indeed. I must confess I forgot that there are a number of applier
fibers and blocking write does block only the fiber which has initiated
the write procedure, not other fibers.

> I was wondering what would happen if someone else sent this instance
> another synchro row. Looks like nothing bad but I just wanted to
> double-check.
> 
> And looks like there's a bug, which I'm speaking of below. It's about
> someone sending us normal rows (either synchronous transactions or
> asynchronous, but not CONFIRM/ROLLBACK entries) while we're waiting for
> syncro row's write to end.
> 
> Say, limbo was owned by instance 1, and instance 2 has written CONFIRM
> for everything there was. While we wait for 2's CONFIRM to be written to
> WAL, we may receive some rows from instance 3, who has already applied 2's
> CONFIRM. Since we haven't written the CONFIRM yet, we haven't applied it,
> and the limbo on our instance still isn't empty. All the rows coming from
> 3 will get rejected and replication between 3 and us will be broken.

Hmm, looks so, need to think about.

  reply	other threads:[~2021-04-08 10:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-07 22:47 Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-04-08  8:39 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-04-08 10:19   ` Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches
2021-04-08 10:32     ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-04-08 10:46       ` Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches [this message]
2021-04-08 22:57       ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-04-09  8:25         ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-04-09 21:32           ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-04-08 22:56   ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-04-09  8:26     ` Serge Petrenko 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=YG7fGGs2WbV8ap16@grain \
    --to=tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org \
    --cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
    --cc=sergepetrenko@tarantool.org \
    --cc=v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org \
    --subject='Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 1/1] applier: process synchro rows after WAL write' \
    /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