Bug #47287 | RBR: replication diff on basic case with txn- and non-txn tables in a statement | ||
---|---|---|---|
Submitted: | 12 Sep 2009 21:06 | Modified: | 19 Dec 2009 11:22 |
Reporter: | Elena Stepanova | Email Updates: | |
Status: | Closed | Impact on me: | |
Category: | MySQL Server: Replication | Severity: | S2 (Serious) |
Version: | 5.1.38, 5,1,39 | OS: | Any |
Assigned to: | Alfranio Tavares Correia Junior | CPU Architecture: | Any |
Tags: | regression |
[12 Sep 2009 21:06]
Elena Stepanova
[17 Sep 2009 15:22]
Bugs System
A patch for this bug has been committed. After review, it may be pushed to the relevant source trees for release in the next version. You can access the patch from: http://lists.mysql.com/commits/83622 3111 Alfranio Correia 2009-09-17 BUG#47287 RBR: replication diff on basic case with txn- and non-txn tables in a statement Let - T be a transactional table and N non-transactional table. - B be begin, C commit and R rollback. - M be a mixed statement, i.e. a statement that updates both T and N. - M* be a mixed statement that fails while updating either T or N. This patch restore the behavior presented in 5.1.37 for rows either produced in the RBR or MIXED modes, when a M* statement that happened early in a transaction had their changes written to the binary log outside the boundaries of the transaction and wrapped in a BEGIN/ROLLBACK. This was done to keep the slave consistent with with the master as the rollback would keep the changes on N and undo them on T. In particular, we do what folllows: . B M* T C would log - B M* R B T C. Note that, we are not preserving history from the master as we are introducing a rollback that never happened. However, this seems to be more acceptable than making the slave diverge. We do not fix the following case: . B T M* C would log B T M* C. The slave will diverge as the changes on T tables that originated from the M statement are rolled back on the master but not on the slave. Unfortunately, we cannot simply rollback the transaction as this would undo any uncommitted changes on T tables. SBR is not considered in this patch because a failing statement is written to the binary along with the error code and a slave executes and then rolls back the statement when it has an associated error code, thus undoing the effects on T. In RBR and MBR, a full-fledge fix will be pushed after the WL 2687.
[22 Sep 2009 6:40]
Bugs System
A patch for this bug has been committed. After review, it may be pushed to the relevant source trees for release in the next version. You can access the patch from: http://lists.mysql.com/commits/84036 3117 Alfranio Correia 2009-09-22 BUG#47287 RBR: replication diff on basic case with txn- and non-txn tables in a statement Let - T be a transactional table and N non-transactional table. - B be begin, C commit and R rollback. - M be a mixed statement, i.e. a statement that updates both T and N. - M* be a mixed statement that fails while updating either T or N. This patch restore the behavior presented in 5.1.37 for rows either produced in the RBR or MIXED modes, when a M* statement that happened early in a transaction had their changes written to the binary log outside the boundaries of the transaction and wrapped in a BEGIN/ROLLBACK. This was done to keep the slave consistent with with the master as the rollback would keep the changes on N and undo them on T. In particular, we do what follows: . B M* T C would log - B M* R B T C. Note that, we are not preserving history from the master as we are introducing a rollback that never happened. However, this seems to be more acceptable than making the slave diverge. We do not fix the following case: . B T M* C would log B T M* C. The slave will diverge as the changes on T tables that originated from the M statement are rolled back on the master but not on the slave. Unfortunately, we cannot simply rollback the transaction as this would undo any uncommitted changes on T tables. SBR is not considered in this patch because a failing statement is written to the binary along with the error code and a slave executes and then rolls back the statement when it has an associated error code, thus undoing the effects on T. In RBR and MBR, a full-fledged fix will be pushed after the WL 2687.
[23 Sep 2009 2:32]
Bugs System
A patch for this bug has been committed. After review, it may be pushed to the relevant source trees for release in the next version. You can access the patch from: http://lists.mysql.com/commits/84230 3117 Alfranio Correia 2009-09-23 BUG#47287 RBR: replication diff on basic case with txn- and non-txn tables in a statement Let - T be a transactional table and N non-transactional table. - B be begin, C commit and R rollback. - M be a mixed statement, i.e. a statement that updates both T and N. - M* be a mixed statement that fails while updating either T or N. This patch restore the behavior presented in 5.1.37 for rows either produced in the RBR or MIXED modes, when a M* statement that happened early in a transaction had their changes written to the binary log outside the boundaries of the transaction and wrapped in a BEGIN/ROLLBACK. This was done to keep the slave consistent with with the master as the rollback would keep the changes on N and undo them on T. In particular, we do what follows: . B M* T C would log - B M* R B T C. Note that, we are not preserving history from the master as we are introducing a rollback that never happened. However, this seems to be more acceptable than making the slave diverge. We do not fix the following case: . B T M* C would log B T M* C. The slave will diverge as the changes on T tables that originated from the M statement are rolled back on the master but not on the slave. Unfortunately, we cannot simply rollback the transaction as this would undo any uncommitted changes on T tables. SBR is not considered in this patch because a failing statement is written to the binary along with the error code and a slave executes and then rolls back the statement when it has an associated error code, thus undoing the effects on T. In RBR and MBR, a full-fledged fix will be pushed after the WL 2687.
[23 Sep 2009 2:49]
Alfranio Tavares Correia Junior
See also BUG#47175.
[28 Sep 2009 12:56]
Bugs System
A patch for this bug has been committed. After review, it may be pushed to the relevant source trees for release in the next version. You can access the patch from: http://lists.mysql.com/commits/84850 3139 Alfranio Correia 2009-09-28 BUG#47287 RBR: replication diff on basic case with txn- and non-txn tables in a statement Let - T be a transactional table and N non-transactional table. - B be begin, C commit and R rollback. - M be a mixed statement, i.e. a statement that updates both T and N. - M* be a mixed statement that fails while updating either T or N. This patch restore the behavior presented in 5.1.37 for rows either produced in the RBR or MIXED modes, when a M* statement that happened early in a transaction had their changes written to the binary log outside the boundaries of the transaction and wrapped in a BEGIN/ROLLBACK. This was done to keep the slave consistent with with the master as the rollback would keep the changes on N and undo them on T. In particular, we do what follows: . B M* T C would log - B M* R B T C. Note that, we are not preserving history from the master as we are introducing a rollback that never happened. However, this seems to be more acceptable than making the slave diverge. We do not fix the following case: . B T M* C would log B T M* C. The slave will diverge as the changes on T tables that originated from the M statement are rolled back on the master but not on the slave. Unfortunately, we cannot simply rollback the transaction as this would undo any uncommitted changes on T tables. SBR is not considered in this patch because a failing statement is written to the binary along with the error code and a slave executes and then rolls back the statement when it has an associated error code, thus undoing the effects on T. In RBR and MBR, a full-fledged fix will be pushed after the WL 2687.
[6 Oct 2009 0:40]
Bugs System
A patch for this bug has been committed. After review, it may be pushed to the relevant source trees for release in the next version. You can access the patch from: http://lists.mysql.com/commits/85809 3139 Alfranio Correia 2009-10-06 BUG#47287 RBR: replication diff on basic case with txn- and non-txn tables in a statement Let - T be a transactional table and N non-transactional table. - B be begin, C commit and R rollback. - M be a mixed statement, i.e. a statement that updates both T and N. - M* be a mixed statement that fails while updating either T or N. This patch restore the behavior presented in 5.1.37 for rows either produced in the RBR or MIXED modes, when a M* statement that happened early in a transaction had their changes written to the binary log outside the boundaries of the transaction and wrapped in a BEGIN/ROLLBACK. This was done to keep the slave consistent with with the master as the rollback would keep the changes on N and undo them on T. In particular, we do what follows: . B M* T C would log - B M* R B T C. Note that, we are not preserving history from the master as we are introducing a rollback that never happened. However, this seems to be more acceptable than making the slave diverge. We do not fix the following case: . B T M* C would log B T M* C. The slave will diverge as the changes on T tables that originated from the M statement are rolled back on the master but not on the slave. Unfortunately, we cannot simply rollback the transaction as this would undo any uncommitted changes on T tables. SBR is not considered in this patch because a failing statement is written to the binary along with the error code and a slave executes and then rolls back the statement when it has an associated error code, thus undoing the effects on T. In RBR and MBR, a full-fledged fix will be pushed after the WL 2687.
[7 Oct 2009 17:59]
Alfranio Tavares Correia Junior
Pushed to mysql-5.1-bugteam and mysql-pe.
[21 Oct 2009 19:21]
Magnus BlÄudd
Patch for this bug causes compiler warnings since label end: is no longer used. Please fix. - goto end; sql/log.cc: 1552 label 'end' defined but not used libmysqld/log.cc: 1552 label 'end' defined but not used
[22 Oct 2009 6:33]
Bugs System
Pushed into 6.0.14-alpha (revid:alik@sun.com-20091022063126-l0qzirh9xyhp0bpc) (version source revid:alik@sun.com-20091019135554-s1pvptt6i750lfhv) (merge vers: 6.0.14-alpha) (pib:13)
[22 Oct 2009 7:05]
Bugs System
Pushed into 5.5.0-beta (revid:alik@sun.com-20091022060553-znkmxm0g0gm6ckvw) (version source revid:alik@sun.com-20091015131113-wldlkdtoe9oebb2z) (merge vers: 5.5.0-beta) (pib:13)
[22 Oct 2009 10:19]
Bugs System
A patch for this bug has been committed. After review, it may be pushed to the relevant source trees for release in the next version. You can access the patch from: http://lists.mysql.com/commits/87757 3189 Alfranio Correia 2009-10-22 Post-fix for BUG#47287. The label "end" was causing compiler warnings as it was no longer used. To fix the problem we removed it.
[4 Nov 2009 9:24]
Bugs System
Pushed into 5.1.41 (revid:joro@sun.com-20091104092152-qz96bzlf2o1japwc) (version source revid:kristofer.pettersson@sun.com-20091103162305-08l4gkeuif2ozsoj) (merge vers: 5.1.41) (pib:13)
[10 Nov 2009 12:01]
Jon Stephens
Documented bugfix in the 5.1.41 changelog as follows: When using the row-based format to replicate a transaction involving both transactional and non-transactional engines, which contained a DML statement affecting multiple rows, the statement failed; if this transaction was followed by a COMMIT, the master and the slave could diverge, because the statement was correctly rolled back on the master, but was applied on the slave. NOTE: Additional documentation work needs to be done with regard to this and related bugs/issues, but we need the changelog entry for the impending 5.1.41 release. Paul or I will take care of these additional requirements ASAP.
[11 Nov 2009 6:48]
Bugs System
Pushed into 6.0.14-alpha (revid:alik@sun.com-20091110093407-rw5g8dys2baqkt67) (version source revid:alik@sun.com-20091109080109-7dxapd5y5pxlu08w) (merge vers: 6.0.14-alpha) (pib:13)
[11 Nov 2009 6:56]
Bugs System
Pushed into 5.5.0-beta (revid:alik@sun.com-20091109115615-nuohp02h8mdrz8m2) (version source revid:alik@sun.com-20091105092041-sp6eyod7sdlfuj3b) (merge vers: 5.5.0-beta) (pib:13)
[11 Nov 2009 14:58]
Jon Stephens
Added changelog entry for 5.5.0 and 6.0.14. See my previous comment.
[18 Dec 2009 10:26]
Bugs System
Pushed into 5.1.41-ndb-7.1.0 (revid:jonas@mysql.com-20091218102229-64tk47xonu3dv6r6) (version source revid:jonas@mysql.com-20091218095730-26gwjidfsdw45dto) (merge vers: 5.1.41-ndb-7.1.0) (pib:15)
[18 Dec 2009 10:42]
Bugs System
Pushed into 5.1.41-ndb-6.2.19 (revid:jonas@mysql.com-20091218100224-vtzr0fahhsuhjsmt) (version source revid:jonas@mysql.com-20091217101452-qwzyaig50w74xmye) (merge vers: 5.1.41-ndb-6.2.19) (pib:15)
[18 Dec 2009 10:57]
Bugs System
Pushed into 5.1.41-ndb-6.3.31 (revid:jonas@mysql.com-20091218100616-75d9tek96o6ob6k0) (version source revid:jonas@mysql.com-20091217154335-290no45qdins5bwo) (merge vers: 5.1.41-ndb-6.3.31) (pib:15)
[18 Dec 2009 11:12]
Bugs System
Pushed into 5.1.41-ndb-7.0.11 (revid:jonas@mysql.com-20091218101303-ga32mrnr15jsa606) (version source revid:jonas@mysql.com-20091218064304-ezreonykd9f4kelk) (merge vers: 5.1.41-ndb-7.0.11) (pib:15)
[19 Dec 2009 11:22]
Jon Stephens
No additional changelog entries needed. Setting back to Closed state.