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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

raftstore: block in-memory pessimistic locks during the flashback #14859

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jun 1, 2023
Merged

raftstore: block in-memory pessimistic locks during the flashback #14859

merged 3 commits into from
Jun 1, 2023

Conversation

JmPotato
Copy link
Member

@JmPotato JmPotato commented May 31, 2023 •
edited
Loading

What is changed and how it works?

Issue Number: ref #13303, close pingcap/tidb#44292.

What's Changed:

During the Flashback process, we should prevent any read or write operations on the in-memory pessimistic lock table
and clear it like rolling back other locks to ensure that Flashback can proceed smoothly.

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test

Release note 

Fix the issue where in-memory pessimistic locks may cause flashback to fail and lead to data inconsistency.

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Contributor

ti-chi-bot bot commented May 31, 2023 •
edited
Loading

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

  • overvenus
  • you06

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 bot added do-not-merge/needs-linked-issue release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. do-not-merge/needs-triage-completed size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels May 31, 2023
@JmPotato JmPotato requested review from overvenus and you06 May 31, 2023 09:53
overvenus
overvenus reviewed May 31, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@overvenus overvenus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Rest LGTM

components/raftstore-v2/src/operation/command/admin/flashback.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@JmPotato
Make clippy happy
1c30a3d 
Signed-off-by: JmPotato <[email protected]>
@JmPotato JmPotato requested a review from overvenus May 31, 2023 10:12
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label May 31, 2023
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. and removed status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. labels May 31, 2023
@JmPotato
Fix the test
424cae0 
Signed-off-by: JmPotato <[email protected]>
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added needs-cherry-pick-release-6.5 Should cherry pick this PR to release-6.5 branch. needs-cherry-pick-release-7.1 Should cherry pick this PR to release-7.1 branch. and removed do-not-merge/needs-triage-completed labels May 31, 2023
HuSharp
HuSharp approved these changes May 31, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@HuSharp HuSharp 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
Copy link
Contributor

ti-chi-bot bot commented May 31, 2023

@HuSharp: Thanks for your review. The bot only counts approvals from reviewers and higher roles in list, but you're still welcome to leave your comments.

In response to this:

LGTM!

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository.

@HuSharp
Copy link
Member

HuSharp commented May 31, 2023

/test

@overvenus
Copy link
Member

/merge

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Contributor

ti-chi-bot bot commented Jun 1, 2023

@overvenus: It seems you want to merge this PR, I will help you trigger all the tests:

/run-all-tests

You only need to trigger /merge once, and if the CI test fails, you just re-trigger the test that failed and the bot will merge the PR for you after the CI passes.

If you have any questions about the PR merge process, please refer to pr process.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository.

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Contributor

ti-chi-bot bot commented Jun 1, 2023

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

Commit hash: 424cae0

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Jun 1, 2023
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot merged commit 9aa1d73 into tikv:master Jun 1, 2023
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added this to the Pool milestone Jun 1, 2023
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Merged
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created to branch release-6.5: #14861.

ti-chi-bot pushed a commit to ti-chi-bot/tikv that referenced this pull request Jun 1, 2023
@JmPotato @ti-chi-bot
This is an automated cherry-pick of tikv#14859
bb93810 
ref tikv#13303, close pingcap/tidb#44292

Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <[email protected]>
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Merged
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created to branch release-7.1: #14862.

ti-chi-bot pushed a commit to ti-chi-bot/tikv that referenced this pull request Jun 1, 2023
@JmPotato @ti-chi-bot
This is an automated cherry-pick of tikv#14859
aad9091 
ref tikv#13303, close pingcap/tidb#44292

Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <[email protected]>
@JmPotato JmPotato deleted the in_memory_lock_flashback branch June 1, 2023 03:14
@Defined2014 Defined2014 mentioned this pull request Jun 2, 2023
Closed
ti-chi-bot bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 5, 2023
@ti-chi-bot @JmPotato
raftstore: block in-memory pessimistic locks during the flashback (#1…
b0defbb 
…4859) (#14861)

ref #13303, ref #14859, close pingcap/tidb#44292

During the Flashback process, we should prevent any read or write operations on the in-memory pessimistic lock table
and clear it like rolling back other locks to ensure that Flashback can proceed smoothly.

Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: JmPotato <[email protected]>

Co-authored-by: JmPotato <[email protected]>
ti-chi-bot bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 16, 2023
@ti-chi-bot @JmPotato
raftstore: block in-memory pessimistic locks during the flashback (#1…
f650e63 
…4859) (#14862)

ref #13303, ref #14859, close pingcap/tidb#44292

During the Flashback process, we should prevent any read or write operations on the in-memory pessimistic lock table
and clear it like rolling back other locks to ensure that Flashback can proceed smoothly.

Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: JmPotato <[email protected]>

Co-authored-by: JmPotato <[email protected]>
tonyxuqqi pushed a commit to tonyxuqqi/tikv that referenced this pull request Jun 22, 2023
@JmPotato @tonyxuqqi
raftstore: block in-memory pessimistic locks during the flashback (ti…
fd273d8 
…kv#14859)

ref tikv#13303, close pingcap/tidb#44292

During the Flashback process, we should prevent any read or write operations on the in-memory pessimistic lock table
and clear it like rolling back other locks to ensure that Flashback can proceed smoothly.

Signed-off-by: JmPotato <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: tonyxuqqi <[email protected]>
@Defined2014 Defined2014 mentioned this pull request Jun 25, 2023
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@HuSharp HuSharp HuSharp approved these changes

@you06 you06 you06 approved these changes

@overvenus overvenus overvenus approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
needs-cherry-pick-release-6.5 Should cherry pick this PR to release-6.5 branch. needs-cherry-pick-release-7.1 Should cherry pick this PR to release-7.1 branch. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 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
Milestone
Pool
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Some regions still in flashback state after flashback cluster done
5 participants
@JmPotato @HuSharp @overvenus @ti-chi-bot @you06