serializable snapshot isolation
play

Serializable Snapshot Isolation Making ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Serializable Snapshot Isolation Making ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE Provide Serializable Isolation Dan Ports Kevin Grittner MIT Wisconsin Court System Saturday, May 21, 2011 1 Overview Serializable isolation makes it easier to reason


  1. Serializable Snapshot Isolation Making ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE Provide Serializable Isolation Dan Ports Kevin Grittner MIT Wisconsin Court System Saturday, May 21, 2011 1

  2. Overview Serializable isolation makes it easier to reason about concurrent transactions In 9.0 and before, SERIALIZABLE was really snapshot isolation – allows anomalies in 9.1: Serializable Snapshot Isolation (SSI) • a new way to ensure true serializability (first implementation in a production DBMS!) Saturday, May 21, 2011 2

  3. Agenda • What is serializability? Why do we want it? • Snapshot isolation vs. serializability • Serializable Snapshot Isolation • SSI implementation overview • Using SSI • Performance results Saturday, May 21, 2011 3

  4. Transactions Transactions group related operations: shouldn ʼ t see one operation without the others • ...even if the system crashes (recoverability) • ...even if other transactions are executing concurrently ( isolation ) Saturday, May 21, 2011 4

  5. Isolation Serializable isolation: each transaction is guaranteed to behave as though it ʼ s the only one running • makes it easy to reason about each transaction ʼ s behavior in isolation Weaker isolation levels: • concurrent transactions can cause anomalous behavior Saturday, May 21, 2011 5

  6. Isolation Levels SQL Standard SERIALIZABLE t REPEATABLE READ READ COMMITTED ment READ s UNCOMMITTED Saturday, May 21, 2011 6

  7. Isolation Levels SQL Standard 9.0 SERIALIZABLE snapshot t REPEATABLE isolation READ READ per-statement COMMITTED snapshots ment READ s UNCOMMITTED Saturday, May 21, 2011 6

  8. Isolation Levels SQL Standard 9.0 9.1 SERIALIZABLE SSI snapshot t REPEATABLE isolation snapshot READ isolation READ per-statement per-statement COMMITTED snapshots snapshots ment READ s UNCOMMITTED Saturday, May 21, 2011 6

  9. Snapshot Isolation Each transaction sees a “snapshot” of DB taken at its first query • implemented using MVCC • tuple-level write locks prevent concurrent modifications Still a weaker isolation level than true serializability! Saturday, May 21, 2011 7

  10. Agenda • What is serializability? Why do we want it? • Snapshot isolation vs. serializability • Serializable Snapshot Isolation • SSI implementation overview • Using SSI • Performance results Saturday, May 21, 2011 8

  11. Goal: ensure at least one guard always on-duty guard on-duty? uty? Alice y Bob y Saturday, May 21, 2011 9

  12. BEGIN Goal: ensure at least one SELECT count(*) guard always on-duty FROM guards WHERE on-duty = y if > 1 { UPDATE guards SET on-duty = n WHERE guard = x } guard on-duty? uty? COMMIT Alice y Bob y Saturday, May 21, 2011 9

  13. guard on-duty? uty? Alice y Bob y Saturday, May 21, 2011 10

  14. BEGIN SELECT count(*) FROM guards WHERE on-duty = y [result = 2] guard on-duty? uty? Alice y Bob y Saturday, May 21, 2011 10

  15. BEGIN BEGIN SELECT count(*) SELECT count(*) FROM guards FROM guard WHERE on-duty = y WHERE on-duty = y [result = 2] [result = 2] guard on-duty? uty? Alice y Bob y Saturday, May 21, 2011 10

  16. BEGIN BEGIN SELECT count(*) SELECT count(*) FROM guards FROM guard WHERE on-duty = y WHERE on-duty = y [result = 2] [result = 2] if > 1 { UPDATE guards SET on-duty = n WHERE guard = ʻ Alice ʼ } COMMIT guard on-duty? uty? Alice y Bob y Saturday, May 21, 2011 10

  17. BEGIN BEGIN SELECT count(*) SELECT count(*) FROM guards FROM guard WHERE on-duty = y WHERE on-duty = y [result = 2] [result = 2] if > 1 { UPDATE guards SET on-duty = n WHERE guard = ʻ Alice ʼ } COMMIT guard on-duty? uty? n Alice y Bob y Saturday, May 21, 2011 10

  18. BEGIN BEGIN SELECT count(*) SELECT count(*) FROM guards FROM guard WHERE on-duty = y WHERE on-duty = y [result = 2] [result = 2] if > 1 { UPDATE guards SET on-duty = n WHERE guard = ʻ Alice ʼ } if > 1 { COMMIT UPDATE guards SET on-duty = n WHERE guards = ʻ Bob ʼ } guard on-duty? uty? COMMIT n Alice y Bob y Saturday, May 21, 2011 10

  19. BEGIN BEGIN SELECT count(*) SELECT count(*) FROM guards FROM guard WHERE on-duty = y WHERE on-duty = y [result = 2] [result = 2] if > 1 { UPDATE guards SET on-duty = n WHERE guard = ʻ Alice ʼ } if > 1 { COMMIT UPDATE guards SET on-duty = n WHERE guards = ʻ Bob ʼ } guard on-duty? uty? COMMIT n Alice y Bob y n Saturday, May 21, 2011 10

  20. Serializable means: results equivalent to some serial ordering of the transactions Serialization history graph shows dependencies between transactions • A ➔ B (“wr-dependency”) if B sees a change made by A • A ➔ B (“ww-dependency”) if B overwrites a change by A • B ➔ A (“rw-conflict”) if B doesn ʼ t see a change made by A Serializable if no cycle in graph Saturday, May 21, 2011 11

  21. BEGIN BEGIN SELECT count(*) SELECT count(*) FROM guards FROM guard WHERE on-duty = y WHERE on-duty = y [result = 2] [result = 2] if > 1 { UPDATE guards SET on-duty = n WHERE guard = ʻ Alice ʼ } if > 1 { COMMIT UPDATE guards SET on-duty = n WHERE guards = ʻ Bob ʼ } guard on-duty? uty? COMMIT n Alice y Bob y n Saturday, May 21, 2011 12

  22. BEGIN BEGIN SELECT count(*) SELECT count(*) rw-conflict: FROM guards FROM guard T1 didn ʼ t see WHERE on-duty = y WHERE on-duty = y T2 ʼ s UPDATE [result = 2] [result = 2] if > 1 { UPDATE guards SET on-duty = n WHERE guard = ʻ Alice ʼ } if > 1 { COMMIT UPDATE guards SET on-duty = n WHERE guards = ʻ Bob ʼ } guard on-duty? uty? COMMIT n Alice y Bob y n Saturday, May 21, 2011 12

  23. BEGIN BEGIN SELECT count(*) SELECT count(*) rw-conflict: FROM guards FROM guard T1 didn ʼ t see WHERE on-duty = y WHERE on-duty = y T2 ʼ s UPDATE [result = 2] [result = 2] rw-conflict: if > 1 { T2 didn ʼ t see UPDATE guards T1 ʼ s UPDATE SET on-duty = n WHERE guard = ʻ Alice ʼ } if > 1 { COMMIT UPDATE guards SET on-duty = n WHERE guards = ʻ Bob ʼ } guard on-duty? uty? COMMIT n Alice y Bob y n Saturday, May 21, 2011 12

  24. T1 rw-conflict: rw-conflict: T1 didn ʼ t see T2 didn ʼ t see T2 ʼ s UPDATE T1 ʼ s UPDATE T2 cycle means no serial order exists! T1 before T2 before T1... Saturday, May 21, 2011 13

  25. Batch Processing Example • control table just holds current batch # • receipts table entries tagged w/ batch # Three transactions: • read current batch, insert receipt tagged w/ it • increment current batch # • read batch, get all receipts for previous batch Invariant : after we read yesterday ʼ s report, no new receipts for yesterday should appear Saturday, May 21, 2011 14

  26. T1 T2 SELECT batch rw-conflict: T1 didn ʼ t see T2 ʼ s UPDATE FROM control [result = 5/19] UPDATE control SET batch = 5/20 COMMIT INSERT receipt (5/19, …) COMMIT Saturday, May 21, 2011 15

  27. T1 [add-receipt] rw-conflict: T2 T1 didn ʼ t see T2 ʼ s UPDATE [incr-batch] Serializable! Apparent order of execution: T1 before T2 ...but T2 committed before T1. That ʼ s OK! Saturday, May 21, 2011 16

  28. T1 T2 T3 SELECT batch FROM control [result = 5/19] UPDATE control SET batch = 5/20 COMMIT INSERT receipt (5/19, …) COMMIT Saturday, May 21, 2011 17

  29. T1 T2 T3 SELECT batch FROM control [result = 5/19] UPDATE control SET batch = 5/20 COMMIT SELECT batch... [result = 5/20] SELECT 5/19 receipts INSERT receipt [...] (5/19, …) COMMIT Saturday, May 21, 2011 17

  30. T1 T2 T3 SELECT batch rw-conflict FROM control [result = 5/19] UPDATE control SET batch = 5/20 COMMIT SELECT batch... [result = 5/20] SELECT 5/19 receipts INSERT receipt [...] (5/19, …) COMMIT Saturday, May 21, 2011 17

  31. T1 T2 T3 SELECT batch rw-conflict FROM control [result = 5/19] UPDATE control SET batch = 5/20 wr-dependency COMMIT SELECT batch... [result = 5/20] SELECT 5/19 receipts INSERT receipt [...] (5/19, …) COMMIT Saturday, May 21, 2011 17

  32. T1 T2 T3 SELECT batch rw-conflict FROM control [result = 5/19] UPDATE control SET batch = 5/20 wr-dependency COMMIT SELECT batch... [result = 5/20] rw-conflict SELECT 5/19 receipts INSERT receipt [...] (5/19, …) COMMIT Saturday, May 21, 2011 17

  33. rw-conflict: T3 didn ʼ t see T1 ʼ s INSERT T1 T3 [add-receipt] [report] rw-conflict: wr-dependency: T2 T1 didn ʼ t see T3 did see T2 ʼ s UPDATE [incr-batch] T2 ʼ s UPDATE Not serializable! Adding the read-only transaction creates a cycle. Saturday, May 21, 2011 18

  34. Agenda • What is serializability? Why do we want it? • Snapshot isolation vs. serializability • Serializable Snapshot Isolation • SSI implementation overview • Using SSI • Performance results Saturday, May 21, 2011 19

  35. Existing Approaches to Serializability • ignore the problem, make the user deal • use SELECT FOR UPDATE, LOCK TABLE • can be hard to figure out where to put these! • run one transaction at a time [not practical] • strict two-phase locking • acquire lock on every object read or written • causes readers to block writers & vice versa Saturday, May 21, 2011 20

  36. T1 T2 SELECT batch FROM control [result = 5/19] Saturday, May 21, 2011 21

  37. T1 T2 SELECT batch FROM control [result = 5/19] Saturday, May 21, 2011 21

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend