Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

txn: fix the incorrect untouch used in optimistic transactions(#30447) #30526

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 7, 2022

Conversation

cfzjywxk
Copy link
Contributor

@cfzjywxk cfzjywxk commented Dec 8, 2021

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: ref #30410

Problem Summary:
When the optimistic transaction is used, the untouched key optimization is not compatible with lazy existence check and results in data inconsistency.

What is changed and how it works?

Disable the untouched optimization for this situation when the presumeNotExist flag is set. Cherry-pick #30447 to release 5.1.

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test

Side effects

Documentation

Release note

Fix the data inconsistency caused by incorrect usage of lazy existence check and untouch key optimization.

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

ti-chi-bot commented Dec 8, 2021

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

  • sticnarf
  • youjiali1995

To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling /cc @reviewer in the comment.
After your PR has acquired the required number of LGTMs, you can assign this pull request to the committer in the list by filling /assign @committer in the comment to help you merge this pull request.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review.
Reviewer can cancel approval by submitting a request changes review.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. do-not-merge/cherry-pick-not-approved size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Dec 8, 2021
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Dec 8, 2021
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. and removed status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. labels Dec 8, 2021
@zhouqiang-cl zhouqiang-cl added the cherry-pick-approved Cherry pick PR approved by release team. label Jan 24, 2022
@bb7133
Copy link
Member

bb7133 commented Feb 7, 2022

/merge

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge.

Commit hash: 953c70f

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Feb 7, 2022
@you06
Copy link
Contributor

you06 commented Feb 7, 2022

Why this PR both have do-not-merge/cherry-pick-not-approved and status/can-merge xD.

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

@cfzjywxk: Your PR was out of date, I have automatically updated it for you.

At the same time I will also trigger all tests for you:

/run-all-tests

If the CI test fails, you just re-trigger the test that failed and the bot will merge the PR for you after the CI passes.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot merged commit 2ad7f6a into pingcap:release-5.1 Feb 7, 2022
@zhouqiang-cl zhouqiang-cl added this to the v5.1.4 milestone Feb 10, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cherry-pick-approved Cherry pick PR approved by release team. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. sig/transaction SIG:Transaction size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. type/bugfix This PR fixes a bug. type/5.1-cherry-pick
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants