If you use ACID transactional databases, you’ve probably heard of lock wait timeouts and deadlocks. What are these? And how are they different?

It’s inevitable that many of us will come across these phenomena at some point. Most databases use locking strategies to make sure that data stays consistent when multiple users (or connections, or processes) are reading and modifying the data concurrently.  The locks ensure that only one operation can alter a specific portion of the data at a time as well as serializing changes to further mitigate these race conditions. Without this locking, confusing and incorrect behaviors can happen.

Lock wait timeouts and deadlocks both arise from certain locking mechanisms. A lock wait timeout results when one user gets a lock on some data and holds it while another user …

Introduction Last week, Burkhard Graves asked me to answer the following StackOverflow question: And, since he wasn’t convinced about my answer: I decided to turn it into a dedicated article and explain how UPSERT and MERGE work in the top 4 most common relational database systems: Oracle, SQL Server, PostgreSQL, and MySQL. Domain Model For … Continue reading How do UPSERT and MERGE work in Oracle, SQL Server, PostgreSQL and MySQL →

The post How do UPSERT and MERGE work in Oracle, SQL Server, PostgreSQL and MySQL appeared first on Vlad Mihalcea's Blog.

What is the difference between InnoDB locks and transaction isolation level? We’ll discuss it in this post.

Recently I received a question from a user about one of my earlier blog posts. Since it wasn’t sent as a comment, I will answer it here. The question:

> I am reading your article:
> https://www.percona.com/resources/technical-presentations/troubleshooting-locking-issues-percona-mysql-webinar

> Full table scan locks whole table.

> Some bad select (read) query can do full table scan on InnoDB, does it lock whole table please?

> My understanding was that SELECT (read) blocks another DML only in MyISAM.

To answer this question, we to need understand two different concepts: locking and …

Sometimes you don’t want to do anything. This is understandably human, and probably a sign you should either relax or get up and do something.

For processors, you sometimes do actually want to do absolutely nothing. Often this will be while waiting for a lock. You want to do nothing until the lock is free, but you want to be quick about it, you want to start work once that lock is free as soon as possible.

On CPU cores with more than one thread (e.g. hyperthreading on Intel, SMT on POWER) you likely want to let the other threads have all of the resources of the core if you’re sitting there waiting for something.

So, what do you do? On x86 there’s been the PAUSE instruction for a while and on POWER there’s been the SMT priority instructions.

The x86 PAUSE instruction delays execution of the next instruction for some amount …

Each day there is probably work done to improve performance of the InnoDB storage engine and remove bottlenecks and scalability issues. Hence there was another one I wanted to highlight:

Scalability issues due to tables without primary keys

This scalability issue is caused by the usage of tables without primary keys. This issue typically shows itself as contention on the InnoDB dict_sys mutex. Now the dict_sys mutex controls access to the data dictionary. This mutex is used at various places. I will only mention a few of them:

• During operations such as opening and closing table handles, or
• When accessing I_S tables, or
• During undo of a freshly inserted row, or
• During other data dictionary modification operations such as CREATE TABLE, or
• Within the “Persistent Stats” subsystem, among other things.

Of course this list is not exhaustive but should …

Read the original article at MySQL needs single master to check data integrity

MySQL slaves can drift out of sync. Many of our clients are surprised to find some data differences in their replication topology, once we do some checking and sniffing around. Such checks require a single reliable or authoritative master to compare against. Click through to the end for multi-master solutions that work with MySQL. Reason [...]

For more articles like these go to Sean Hull's Scalable Startups

Related posts:

1. MySQL requires an authoritative master to build slaves
2. …

While most of the talk recently has mostly been around the new changes in MySQL 5.6 (and that is understandable), I have had lately some very interesting cases to deal with, with respect to the Metadata Locking related changes that were introduced in MySQL 5.5.3. It appears that the implications of Metadata Locking have not been covered well, and since there are still a large number of MySQL 5.0 and 5.1 installations that would upgrade or are in the process of upgrading to MySQL 5.5, I thought it necessary to discuss what these implications exactly are.

The post Implications of Metadata Locking Changes in MySQL 5.5 appeared first on ovais.tariq.

As an instructor with Percona I’m sometimes asked about the differences between the READ COMMITTED and REPEATABLE READ transaction isolation levels.  There are a few differences between READ-COMMITTED and REPEATABLE-READ, and they are all related to locking.

Extra locking (not gap locking)
It is important to remember that InnoDB actually locks index entries, not rows. During the execution of a statement InnoDB must lock every entry in the index that it traverses to find the rows it is modifying. It must do this to prevent deadlocks and maintain the isolation level.

If you run an UPDATE that is not well indexed you will lock many rows:

update employees set store_id = 0 where store_id = 1;
---TRANSACTION 1EAB04, ACTIVE 7 sec
633 lock struct(s), heap size 96696, 218786 row lock(s), undo log entries 1
MySQL thread id 4, OS thread handle 0x7f8dfc35d700, query id 47 localhost root …

This recent session at OSDC 2011 Canberra is based on part of an Open Query training day, and (due to time constraints) without much of the usual interactivity, exercises and further MySQL specific detail. People liked it anyway, which is nice! The info as presented is not MySQL specific, it provides general insight in how databases implement concurrency and what trade-offs they make.

See http://2011.osdc.com.au/SQLL for the talk abstract.

Vadim and others have pointed at the index->lock problems before, but I think they didn’t good job enough at pointing out how bad it can get (the actual problematic was hidden somewhere as some odd edge case). What ‘index lock’ means is generally the fact that InnoDB has table-level locking which will kill performance on big tables miserably.

InnoDB is a huge pie of layers, that have various locking behaviors, and are layered on top of each other, and are structured nicely as subdirectories in your innodb_plugin directory. Low level storage interfaces are done via os/ routines, then on top of that there’s some file space manager, fsp/, which allocates space for btr/ to live in, where individual page/ entities live, with multiple row/ pieces. There’re few other subsystems around, that got …