MDEV-26077 Assertion err != DB_DUPLICATE_KEY or unexpected ER_TABLE_EXISTS_ERROR
This is a backport of 161e4bfa. trans_rollback_to_savepoint(): Only release metadata locks (MDL) if the storage engines agree, after the changes were already rolled back. Ever since commit 3792693f and mysql/mysql-server@55ceedbc3feb911505dcba6cee8080d55ce86dda we used to cheat here and always release MDL if the binlog is disabled. MDL are supposed to prevent race conditions between DML and DDL also when no replication is in use. MDL are supposed to be a superset of InnoDB table locks: InnoDB table lock may only exist if the thread also holds MDL on the table name. In the included test case, ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT would wrongly release the MDL on both tables and let ALTER TABLE proceed, even though the DML transaction is actually holding locks on the table. Until commit 1bd681c8 (MDEV-25506) in MariaDB 10.6, InnoDB would often work around the locking violation in a blatantly non-ACID way: If locks exist on a table that is being dropped (in this case, actually a partition of a table that is being rebuilt by ALTER TABLE), InnoDB could move the table (or partition) into a queue, to be dropped after the locks and references had been released. If the lock is not released and the original copy of the table not dropped quickly enough, a name conflict could occur on a subsequent ALTER TABLE. The scenario of commit 3792693f is unaffected by this fix, because mysqldump would use non-locking reads, and the transaction would not be holding any InnoDB locks during the execution of ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT. MVCC reads inside InnoDB are only covered by MDL and page latches, not by any table or record locks. FIXME: It would be nice if storage engines were specifically asked which MDL can be released, instead of only offering a choice between all or nothing. InnoDB should be able to release any locks for tables that are no longer in trx_t::mod_tables, except if another transaction had converted some implicit record locks to explicit ones, before the ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT had been completed. Reviewed by: Sergei Golubchik
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment