Tarantool development patches archive
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
	Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>
Cc: tml <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] limbo: introduce request processing hooks
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 19:49:49 +0300
Message-ID: <d5cfa2b5-7b34-f20d-5957-aa7153ceaf25@tarantool.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YOxkOGgxt/V8sSXN@grain>



12.07.2021 18:48, Cyrill Gorcunov пишет:
> Guys, there are some moments even in current code structure which
> looks somehow strange so I would like to discuss them. Lets consider
> the following case: one replic sends us a promote request (assume
> we're sitting in term 2 and max term is 2).
>
> applier 1
> ---------
> applier_apply_tx
>    (promote term = 3
>     current max term = 2)
>    applier_synchro_filter_tx
>    apply_synchro_row
>      journal_write
>        (sleeping)
>
> at this moment another applier comes in with obsolete
> data and term 2
>                                applier 2
>                                ---------
>                                applier_apply_tx
>                                  (term 2)
>                                  applier_synchro_filter_tx
>                                    txn_limbo_is_replica_outdated -> false
>                                  journal_write (sleep)
>
> applier 1
> ---------
> journal wakes up
>    apply_synchro_row_cb
>      set max term to 3
> return to applier read and
> applier 2 could finish its write
> and wake up too
>
> at this moment the data from applier 2 is actually queued
> for write as valid but we just wrote the term 3, so if we would
> had been updating terms map earlier (before jornal write) the data
> from applier 2 should be NOPified. I think there is some problem
> because due to journal write lag the data is not as it could be
> if terms map updated early. Serge, Vlad, am I right? Which consequences
> can be here? IOW, should not we track terms earlier even without
> my filter series?
Looks like a bug, indeed.

We may either introduce a limbo latch or start tracking terms before the
WAL write.

I'm starting to like the idea with limbo latch more.

It's come up a couple of times already for various occasions, so maybe 
it's time to
finally implement it.

-- 
Serge Petrenko


  reply	other threads:[~2021-07-12 16:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-10 22:28 Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-11 14:00 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-11 18:22   ` Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12  8:03     ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12  8:09       ` Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12 21:20         ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12 22:32           ` Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-13 19:32             ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12  8:01   ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12  8:04     ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12  8:12       ` Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12  8:23         ` Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12 21:20         ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12 22:34           ` Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12  9:43     ` Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12 15:48       ` Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12 16:49         ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches [this message]
2021-07-12 17:04           ` Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12 21:20             ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12 21:52               ` Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches
2021-07-12  7:54 ` 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=d5cfa2b5-7b34-f20d-5957-aa7153ceaf25@tarantool.org \
    --to=tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org \
    --cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
    --cc=sergepetrenko@tarantool.org \
    --cc=v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org \
    /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

Tarantool development patches archive

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://lists.tarantool.org/tarantool-patches/0 tarantool-patches/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 tarantool-patches tarantool-patches/ https://lists.tarantool.org/tarantool-patches \
		tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org.
	public-inbox-index tarantool-patches

Example config snippet for mirrors.


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git