MySQL锁系列(八)之 死锁

    xiaoxiao2021-07-27  243

    能学到什么

    什么是死锁死锁有什么危害典型的死锁案例剖析如何避免死锁

    一、什么是死锁

    1.必须满足的条件 1. 必须有两个或者两个以上的事务 2. 不同事务之间都持有对方需要的锁资源。 A事务需要B的资源,B事务需要A的资源,这就是典型的AB-BA死锁 2.死锁相关的参数 * innodb_print_all_deadlocks 1. 如果这个参数打开,那么死锁相关的信息都会打印输出到error log * innodb_lock_wait_timeout 1. 当MySQL获取row lock的时候,如果wait了innodb_lock_wait_timeout=N的时间,会报以下错误 ERROR 1205 (HY000): Lock wait timeout exceeded; try restarting transaction * innodb_deadlock_detect 1. innodb_deadlock_detect = off 可以关闭掉死锁检测,那么就发生死锁的时候,用锁超时来处理。 2. innodb_deadlock_detect = on (默认选项)开启死锁检测,数据库自动回滚 * innodb_status_lock_output = on 1. 可以看到更加详细的锁信息

    二、死锁有什么危害

    死锁,即表明有多个事务之间需要互相争夺资源而互相等待。如果没有死锁检测,那么就会互相卡死,一直hang死如果有死锁检测机制,那么数据库会自动根据代价来评估出哪些事务可以被回滚掉,用来打破这个僵局所以说:死锁并没有啥坏处,反而可以保护数据库和应用那么出现死锁,而且非常频繁,我们应该调整业务逻辑,让其避免产生死锁方为上策

    三、典型的死锁案例剖析

    3.1 死锁案例一

    典型的 AB-BA 死锁

    session 1: select * from tb_b where id_2 = 1 for update (A) session 2: select * from tb_a where id = 2 for update (B) session 1: select * from tb_a where id = 2 for update (B) session 2: select * from tb_b where id_2 = 1 for update (A) ERROR 1213 (40001): Deadlock found when trying to get lock; try restarting transaction 1213的死锁错误,mysql会自动回滚 哪个回滚代价最小,回滚哪个(根据undo判断) ------------------------ LATEST DETECTED DEADLOCK ------------------------ 2017-06-22 16:39:50 0x7f547dd02700 *** (1) TRANSACTION: TRANSACTION 133601982, ACTIVE 48 sec starting index read mysql tables in use 1, locked 1 LOCK WAIT 4 lock struct(s), heap size 1136, 2 row lock(s) MySQL thread id 11900, OS thread handle 140000866637568, query id 25108 localhost dba statistics select * from tb_a where id = 2 for update -----session1 持有tb_a中记录为2的锁 *** (1) WAITING FOR THIS LOCK TO BE GRANTED: RECORD LOCKS space id 303 page no 3 n bits 72 index PRIMARY of table `lc_5`.`tb_a` trx id 133601982 lock_mode X locks rec but not gap waiting Record lock, heap no 3 PHYSICAL RECORD: n_fields 3; compact format; info bits 0 0: len 4; hex 80000002; asc ;; --session 1 需要tb_a中记录为2的锁( session1 -> session2 ) 1: len 6; hex 000007f69ab2; asc ;; 2: len 7; hex dc000027100110; asc ' ;; *** (2) TRANSACTION: TRANSACTION 133601983, ACTIVE 28 sec starting index read, thread declared inside InnoDB 5000 mysql tables in use 1, locked 1 4 lock struct(s), heap size 1136, 2 row lock(s) MySQL thread id 11901, OS thread handle 140000864773888, query id 25109 localhost dba statistics select * from tb_b where id_2 = 1 for update *** (2) HOLDS THE LOCK(S): RECORD LOCKS space id 303 page no 3 n bits 72 index PRIMARY of table `lc_5`.`tb_a` trx id 133601983 lock_mode X locks rec but not gap Record lock, heap no 3 PHYSICAL RECORD: n_fields 3; compact format; info bits 0 0: len 4; hex 80000002; asc ;; --session 2 持有tb_a中记录等于2的锁 1: len 6; hex 000007f69ab2; asc ;; 2: len 7; hex dc000027100110; asc ' ;; *** (2) WAITING FOR THIS LOCK TO BE GRANTED: RECORD LOCKS space id 304 page no 3 n bits 72 index PRIMARY of table `lc_5`.`tb_b` trx id 133601983 lock_mode X locks rec but not gap waiting Record lock, heap no 2 PHYSICAL RECORD: n_fields 3; compact format; info bits 0 0: len 4; hex 80000001; asc ;; --session 2 需要tb_b中记录为1的锁 ( session2 -> session1 ) 1: len 6; hex 000007f69ab8; asc ;; 2: len 7; hex e0000027120110; asc ' ;; 最终的结果: 死锁路径:[session1 -> session2 , session2 -> session1] ABBA死锁产生

    3.2 死锁案例二

    同一个事务中,S-lock 升级为 X-lock 不能直接继承

    * session 1: mysql> CREATE TABLE t (i INT) ENGINE = InnoDB; Query OK, 0 rows affected (1.07 sec) mysql> INSERT INTO t (i) VALUES(1); Query OK, 1 row affected (0.09 sec) mysql> START TRANSACTION; Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.00 sec) mysql> SELECT * FROM t WHERE i = 1 LOCK IN SHARE MODE; --获取S-lock +------+ | i | +------+ | 1 | +------+ * session 2: mysql> START TRANSACTION; Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.00 sec) mysql> DELETE FROM t WHERE i = 1; --想要获取X-lock,但是被session1的S-lock 卡住,目前处于waiting lock阶段 * session 1: mysql> DELETE FROM t WHERE i = 1; --想要获取X-lock,session1本身拥有S-lock,但是由于session 2 获取X-lock再前,所以session1不能够从S-lock 提升到 X-lock,需要等待session2 释放才可以获取,所以造成死锁 ERROR 1213 (40001): Deadlock found when trying to get lock; try restarting transaction 死锁路径: session2 -> session1 , session1 -> session2

    3.3 死锁案例三

    唯一键死锁 (delete + insert)关键点在于:S-lock

    dba:lc_3> show create table uk; +-------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Table | Create Table | +-------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | uk | CREATE TABLE `uk` ( `a` int(11) NOT NULL, UNIQUE KEY `uniq_a` (`a`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 | +-------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ 1 row in set (0.00 sec) dba:lc_3> select * from uk; +---+ | a | +---+ | 1 | +---+ 1 row in set (0.00 sec) session 1: dba:lc_3> begin; Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.00 sec) dba:lc_3> delete from uk where a=1; Query OK, 1 row affected (0.00 sec) session 2: dba:(none)> use lc_3; Database changed dba:lc_3> insert into uk values(1); --wait lock(想要加S-lock,却被sesson1的X-lock卡住) sesson 3: dba:(none)> use lc_3; Database changed dba:lc_3> insert into uk values(1); --wait lock(想要加S-lock,却被sesson1的X-lock卡住) session 1: commit; --session2和session3 都获得了S-lock,然后都想要去给记录1 加上X-lock,却互相被对方的S-lock卡住,死锁产生 再来看session 2 和 session 3 的结果: session2: Query OK, 1 row affected (7.36 sec) session3: ERROR 1213 (40001): Deadlock found when trying to get lock; try restarting transaction 总结: 试想想,如果session 1 不是commit,而是rollback会是怎么样呢? 大家去测测就会发现,结果肯定是唯一键冲突啊

    3.4 死锁案例四

    主键和二级索引的死锁

    * primary key 1 2 3 4 --primary key col1 10 30 20 40 --idx_key2 col2 100 200 300 400 --idx_key3 col3 * idx_key2 select * from t where col2 > 10: 锁二级索引顺序为:20 =》30 , 对应锁主键的顺序为:3 =》2 10 20 30 40 1 3 2 4 * idx_key3 select * from t where col3 > 100:锁二级索引顺序为:200 =》300 , 对应锁主键的顺序为:2 =》3 100 200 300 400 1 2 3 4 死锁路径: 由于二级索引引起的主键加锁顺序: 3 =》2 由于二级索引引起的主键加锁顺序: 2 =》3 这个要求并发,且刚好 session 1 加锁3的时候 session 2 要加锁2. session 1 加锁2的时候 session 3 要加锁3. 这样就产生了 AB-BA 死锁

    3.5 死锁案例五

    purge + unique key 引发的死锁

    A表的记录: id = 1 10 40 100 200 500 800 900 session 1 : delete from a where id = 10; ??? session 2 : delete from a where id = 800; ??? session 1 : insert into a select 800; ??? session 2 : insert into a select 10; ??? * 如果大家去跑这两钟SQL语句的并发测试,是可以导致死锁的。 * 如何验证是由于purge导致的问题呢?这个本想用mysqld-debug模式去关闭purge线程,但是很遗憾我没能模拟出来。。。

    3.6 死锁案例六

    REPLACE INTO问题

    * 这个问题模拟起来非常简单,原理非常复杂,这里不过多解释 * 详情请看姜老师的文章,据说看懂了年薪都100w了: http://www.innomysql.com/26186-2/ * 解决方案: * 用insert into ... on duplicate key update 代替 replace into * 此方案亲测有效

    四、如何避免死锁

    产生死锁的原因 1. 事务之间互相占用资源 方法和总结 1. 降低隔离级别,修改 RR -> RC , 如果这个调整了,可以避免掉60%的死锁场景和奇怪的锁等待 2. 调整业务逻辑和SQL,让其都按照顺序执行操作 3. 减少unique索引,大部分死锁的场景都是由于unique索引导致 4. 尽量不用replace into,用insert into ... on duplicate key update 代替 相关资源:七夕情人节表白HTML源码(两款)

    最新回复(0)