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

release-24.1: kv: pipeline replicated lock acquisition #121710

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Apr 4, 2024

Conversation

blathers-crl[bot]
Copy link

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot commented Apr 3, 2024

Backport 3/3 commits from #121088 on behalf of @nvanbenschoten.

/cc @cockroachdb/release


Fixes #117978.

Builds upon the foundation laid in #119975, #119933, #121065, and #121086.

This commit completes the client-side handling of replicated lock acquisition pipelining. Replicated lock acquisition through Get, Scan, and ReverseScan requests now qualifies to be pipelined. The txnPipeliner is updated to track the strength associated with each in-flight write and pass that along to the corresponding QueryIntentRequest.

See benchmark with TPC-C results here.

Release note: None


Release justification: needed for customer commitment.

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested a review from a team as a code owner April 3, 2024 16:20
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot force-pushed the blathers/backport-release-24.1-121088 branch from 60dbc06 to 4f5219e Compare April 3, 2024 16:20
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested a review from a team April 3, 2024 16:20
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested a review from a team as a code owner April 3, 2024 16:20
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot added blathers-backport This is a backport that Blathers created automatically. O-robot Originated from a bot. labels Apr 3, 2024
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested review from rytaft and removed request for a team April 3, 2024 16:20
Copy link
Author

blathers-crl bot commented Apr 3, 2024

Thanks for opening a backport.

Please check the backport criteria before merging:

  • Backports should only be created for serious
    issues
    or test-only changes.
  • Backports should not break backwards-compatibility.
  • Backports should change as little code as possible.
  • Backports should not change on-disk formats or node communication protocols.
  • Backports should not add new functionality (except as defined
    here).
  • Backports must not add, edit, or otherwise modify cluster versions; or add version gates.
  • All backports must be reviewed by the owning areas TL and one additional
    TL. For more information as to how that review should be conducted, please consult the backport
    policy
    .
If your backport adds new functionality, please ensure that the following additional criteria are satisfied:
  • There is a high priority need for the functionality that cannot wait until the next release and is difficult to address in another way.
  • The new functionality is additive-only and only runs for clusters which have specifically “opted in” to it (e.g. by a cluster setting).
  • New code is protected by a conditional check that is trivial to verify and ensures that it only runs for opt-in clusters. State changes must be further protected such that nodes running old binaries will not be negatively impacted by the new state (with a mixed version test added).
  • The PM and TL on the team that owns the changed code have signed off that the change obeys the above rules.
  • Your backport must be accompanied by a post to the appropriate Slack
    channel (#db-backports-point-releases or #db-backports-XX-X-release) for awareness and discussion.

Also, please add a brief release justification to the body of your PR to justify this
backport.

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot added the backport Label PR's that are backports to older release branches label Apr 3, 2024
Copy link
Author

blathers-crl bot commented Apr 3, 2024

Your pull request contains more than 1000 changes. It is strongly encouraged to split big PRs into smaller chunks.

🦉 Hoot! I am a Blathers, a bot for CockroachDB. My owner is dev-inf.

@nvanbenschoten nvanbenschoten removed the request for review from rytaft April 3, 2024 16:20
@cockroach-teamcity
Copy link
Member

This change is Reviewable

This mirrors the ShallowCopy method on Request.

Epic: None
Release note: None
This commit steps a read committed transaction's read sequence after
each statement retry. This ensures that the read sequence leads the
ignored sequence number range established when the read committed
statement savepoint was rolled back.

Epic: None
Release note: None
Fixes #117978.

This commit completes the client-side handling of replicated lock acquisition
pipelining. Replicated lock acquisition through Get, Scan, and ReverseScan
requests now qualifies to be pipelined. The `txnPipeliner` is updated to track
the strength associated with each in-flight write and pass that along to the
corresponding QueryIntentRequest.

Release note: None
Fixes #121752.
Fixes #121748.

This commit fixes the txnSeqNumAllocator to conditionally (based on the
stepping mode) auto-step the transaction's read sequence number to the
write sequence number on savepoint rollbacks.

The commit also adds in an assertion into the txnSeqNumAllocator that
the current read sequence is never part of a batch's ignored sequence
number list. This helps us detect the cases that were leading to
assertion errors in #121752 much faster.

Release note: None
@nvanbenschoten nvanbenschoten force-pushed the blathers/backport-release-24.1-121088 branch from 4f5219e to 4847089 Compare April 4, 2024 16:31
@nvanbenschoten nvanbenschoten merged commit e578100 into release-24.1 Apr 4, 2024
19 of 20 checks passed
@nvanbenschoten nvanbenschoten deleted the blathers/backport-release-24.1-121088 branch April 4, 2024 17:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport Label PR's that are backports to older release branches blathers-backport This is a backport that Blathers created automatically. O-robot Originated from a bot.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants