executor: fix panic and update error data when table has column in write only state #8792
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
crazycs520
added
type/bugfix
|
/run-all-tests |
crazycs520
force-pushed
the
panic-by-not-public-column
branch
from
84ae70a to
0cdf468
Compare
|
/rebuild |
|
/run-all-tests |
jackysp
reviewed
Dec 25, 2018
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need to append value to newData after
Line 305 in bd69b15
|
@jackysp newData will already have the value of writeOnly column. tidb/planner/core/logical_plan_builder.go Line 1916 in bd69b15 |
|
How about |
crazycs520
force-pushed
the
panic-by-not-public-column
branch
from
e40f54a to
7ce2a24
Compare
|
/run-all-tests |
winkyao
reviewed
Dec 26, 2018
|
/run-unit-test |
winkyao
reviewed
Dec 26, 2018
executor/write.go
Outdated
| @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ func updateRecord(ctx sessionctx.Context, h int64, oldData, newData []types.Datu | |||
| return false, false, 0, errors.Trace(err) | |||
| } | |||
| // the `affectedRows` is increased when adding new record. | |||
| newHandle, err = t.AddRecord(ctx, newData, skipHandleCheck) | |||
| newHandle, err = t.AddRecord(ctx, newData[:len(t.Cols())], skipHandleCheck) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add some comments to explain.
winkyao
reviewed
Dec 26, 2018
|
@jackysp PTAL |
crazycs520
changed the title
crazycs520
changed the title
crazycs520
changed the title
crazycs520
force-pushed
the
panic-by-not-public-column
branch
from
59d5c39 to
0f5cc8d
Compare
|
/run-all-tests |
|
/run-unit-test |
crazycs520
force-pushed
the
panic-by-not-public-column
branch
from
203e2cd to
a115126
Compare
|
@jackysp How about adding a new interface |
crazycs520
force-pushed
the
panic-by-not-public-column
branch
from
235ae1d to
e95dca1
Compare
|
/run-all-tests |
|
/run-common-test |
|
LGTM |
lysu
added
status/LGT2
winkyao
reviewed
Jan 2, 2019
| @@ -425,7 +425,7 @@ func (t *tableCommon) AddRecord(ctx sessionctx.Context, r []types.Datum, opts .. | |||
| } | |||
| var hasRecordID bool | |||
| cols := t.Cols() | |||
| if len(r) > len(cols) { | |||
| if len(r) > len(cols) && !opt.IsUpdate { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add some comments about opt.IsUpdate
|
/run-all-tests |
crazycs520
added
status/LGT3
|
/run-unit-test |
|
/run-common-test |
1 similar comment
|
/run-common-test |
crazycs520
added a commit
to crazycs520/tidb
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 2, 2019
crazycs520
added a commit
to crazycs520/tidb
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 2, 2019
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What problem does this PR solve?
When table have a column in write only state, there are some problem.
For the following example， surpose table have 3 columns:
a int key,b int,c int not null, but c column is in write only state. column a is primary key, also handle key.because insert only write public column, but update will also write column on write only state. then, in a transaction, insert first, then update will panic because update try to look up the value of write-only column from dirty table when union scan, because insert doesn't write the value of write-only column to dirty table, so update panic by index out of range.
when do update, if handle is changed, update will remove recored first, then call table.AddRecord, update will input newData with write-only column value to
table.AddRecord, buttable.AddRecordwill think the last value is_tidb_rowid, actualy the last value of newData is the value of write-only column. Then will cause update wrong record or overwrite the other row record. see code here: https://github.com/pingcap/tidb/pull/5984/files#diff-f92a6a9ee57cf92f8d63bd55d2edc05bR356Because online change scheme will have atmostly 2 state in cluster. Add column c, state change is: none -> delete only -> write only -> write reorganization -> public. Suppose TiDB-A is in public state , TiDB-B is in write reorganization.
first, execute in TiDB-A:
insert into t (a,b,c) value (1,1,1);then, execute in TiDB-B:
update t set a=2 where a=1;finally, the result of
select a,b,c from tshould be2,1,1, but in fact, the result is2,1,0, the value of column c is overwritten when TiDB-B executes update.What is changed and how it works?
For problem 1: insert should also write value of write-only column to dirty table, to avoid update panic.
For problem 2 and 3, change
table.AddRecordinterface, add a flag to indicate this is call for insert or update. if for update,newData, should not get from default value.Check List
Tests
Code changes
Side effects
Related changes
This change is