欢迎您访问程序员文章站本站旨在为大家提供分享程序员计算机编程知识!
您现在的位置是: 首页  >  数据库

巧用MySQL InnoDB引擎锁机制解决死锁问题_MySQL

程序员文章站 2022-06-12 12:51:12
...
案例如下:

在使用Show innodb status检查引擎状态时,发现了死锁问题:

*** (1) TRANSACTION:

TRANSACTION 0 677833455, ACTIVE 0 sec, process no 11393, OS thread id 278546 starting index read

mysql tables in use 1, locked 1

LOCK WAIT 3 lock struct(s), heap size 320

MySQL thread id 83, query id 162348740 dcnet03 dcnet Searching rows for update

update TSK_TASK set STATUS_ID=1064,UPDATE_TIME=now () where STATUS_ID=1061 and MON_TIME*** (1) WAITING FOR THIS LOCK TO BE GRANTED:

RECORD LOCKS space id 0 page no 849384 n bits 208 index `PRIMARY` of table `dcnet_db/TSK_TASK` trx id 0 677833455 lock_mode X locks rec but not gap waiting

Record lock, heap no 92 PHYSICAL RECORD: n_fields 11; compact format; info bits 0

0: len 8; hex 800000000097629c; asc b ;; 1: len 6; hex 00002866eaee; asc (f ;; 2: len 7; hex 00000d40040110; asc @ ;; 3: len 8; hex 80000000000050b2; asc P ;; 4: len 8; hex 800000000000502a; asc P*;; 5: len 8; hex 8000000000005426; asc T&;; 6: len 8; hex 800012412c66d29c; asc A,f ;; 7: len 23; hex 75706c6f6164666972652e636f6d2f6 8616e642e706870; asc xxx.com/;; 8: len 8; hex 800000000000042b; asc +;; 9: len 4; hex 474bfa2b; asc GK +;; 10: len 8; hex 8000000000004e24; asc N$;;


*** (2) TRANSACTION:

TRANSACTION 0 677833454, ACTIVE 0 sec, process no 11397, OS thread id 344086 updating or deleting, thread declared inside InnoDB 499

mysql tables in use 1, locked 1

3 lock struct(s), heap size 320, undo log entries 1

MySQL thread id 84, query id 162348739 dcnet03 dcnet Updating

update TSK_TASK set STATUS_ID=1067,UPDATE_TIME=now () where ID in (9921180)

*** (2) HOLDS THE LOCK(S):

RECORD LOCKS space id 0 page no 849384 n bits 208 index `PRIMARY` of table `dcnet_db/TSK_TASK` trx id 0 677833454 lock_mode X locks rec but not gap

Record lock, heap no 92 PHYSICAL RECORD: n_fields 11; compact format; info bits 0

0: len 8; hex 800000000097629c; asc b ;; 1: len 6; hex 00002866eaee; asc (f ;; 2: len 7; hex 00000d40040110; asc @ ;; 3: len 8; hex 80000000000050b2; asc P ;; 4: len 8; hex 800000000000502a; asc P*;; 5: len 8; hex 8000000000005426; asc T&;; 6: len 8; hex 800012412c66d29c; asc A,f ;; 7: len 23; hex 75706c6f6164666972652e636f6d2f6 8616e642e706870; asc uploadfire.com/hand.php;; 8: len 8; hex 800000000000042b; asc +;; 9: len 4; hex 474bfa2b; asc GK +;; 10: len 8; hex 8000000000004e24; asc N$;;


*** (2) WAITING FOR THIS LOCK TO BE GRANTED:

RECORD LOCKS space id 0 page no 843102 n bits 600 index `KEY_TSKTASK_MONTIME2` of table `dcnet_db/TSK_TASK` trx id 0 677833454 lock_mode X locks rec but not gap waiting

Record lock, heap no 395 PHYSICAL RECORD: n_fields 3; compact format; info bits 0

0: len 8; hex 8000000000000425; asc %;; 1: len 8; hex 800012412c66d29c; asc A,f ;; 2: len 8; hex 800000000097629c; asc b ;;


*** WE ROLL BACK TRANSACTION (1)


此死锁问题涉及TSK_TASK表,该表用于保存系统监测任务,以下是相关字段及索引:

ID:主键;


MON_TIME:监测时间;


STATUS_ID:任务状态;


索引:KEY_TSKTASK_MONTIME2 (STATUS_ID, MON_TIME)。

分析,涉及的两条语句应该不会涉及相同的TSK_TASK记录,那为什么会造成死锁呢?


查询MySQL官网文档,发现这跟MySQL的索引机制有关。MySQL的InnoDB引擎是行级锁,我原来的理解是直接对记录进行锁定,实际上并不是这样的。

要点如下:


不是对记录进行锁定,而是对索引进行锁定;


在UPDATE、DELETE操作时,MySQL不仅锁定WHERE条件扫描过的所有索引记录,而且会锁定相邻的键值,即所谓的next-key locking;

如语句UPDATE TSK_TASK SET UPDATE_TIME = NOW() WHERE ID > 10000会锁定所有主键大于等于1000的所有记录,在该语句完成之前,你就不能对主键等于10000的记录进行操作;


当非簇索引(non-cluster index)记录被锁定时,相关的簇索引(cluster index)记录也需要被锁定才能完成相应的操作。


再分析一下发生问题的两条SQL语句,就不难找到问题所在了:


当“update TSK_TASK set STATUS_ID=1064,UPDATE_TIME=now () where STATUS_ID=1061 and MON_TIME

假设“update TSK_TASK set STATUS_ID=1067,UPDATE_TIME=now () where ID in (9921180)”几乎同时执行时,本语句首先锁定簇索引(主键),由于需要更新STATUS_ID的值,所以还需要锁定KEY_TSKTASK_MONTIME2的某些索引记录。


这样第一条语句锁定了KEY_TSKTASK_MONTIME2的记录,等待主键索引,而第二条语句则锁定了主键索引记录,而等待KEY_TSKTASK_MONTIME2的记录,在此情况下,死锁就产生了。


笔者通过拆分第一条语句解决死锁问题:

先查出符合条件的ID:select ID from TSK_TASK where STATUS_ID=1061 and MON_TIME

至此,死锁问题彻底解决

相关标签: 检查