洞察掌握android电视app开发中的安全与合规策略,提升企业运营效率
902
2022-10-09
gdb
问题描述
如下图,mysql_upgrade 过程中,执行 DROP DATABASE IF EXISTS performance_schema 一直在等待 metadata lock
问题排查
简单粗暴的方法
有一种简单的解决方法,把其他连接kill掉,释放 metadata lock
对于这个案例,占用元数据锁的是 Id = 107768,User = xx1 的连接
但是这种方法指标不治本,案例中占用元数据锁的连接,是一个agent服务建立的
mysql_upgrade也是程序执行,不能每次都手工kill连接,需要查明为什么占用锁
详细查明问题原因
据业务方反馈,agent服务和调用mysql_upgrade的代码和5.6也在用,没有出现问题。
怀疑是5.7引入的bug
根据上述现象,显然是agent占了metadata lock,大概率不是mysql的bug
为了说服业务方,我们继续排查是在等待什么锁
查询 performance_schema.metadata_locks
首先想到5.7的 performance_schema.metadata_locks ,很遗憾这张表里并没有记录
gdb 获取元数据锁信息
我们尝试使用 gdb 获取锁等待信息
ps aux | grep 端口号,找出mysqld进程号 pid,pstack pid > stack.log
在stack.log中搜索 acquire_lock(请求mdl锁的函数),可以看出是 thread 3 在请求元数据锁
gdb -p pidthread 3切换到目标线程#0 0x0000003fe940ba5e in pthread_cond_timedwait@@GLIBC_2.3.2 () from /lib64/libpthread.so.0#1 0x0000000000bd3fb2 in native_cond_timedwait (this=0x7eff640e05d8, owner=0x7eff640e0540, abs_timeout=0x7effa83b2ce0, set_status_on_timeout=Unhandled dwarf expression opcode 0xf3) #2 my_cond_timedwait (this=0x7eff640e05d8, owner=0x7eff640e0540, abs_timeout=0x7effa83b2ce0, set_status_on_timeout=Unhandled dwarf expression opcode 0xf3) #3 inline_mysql_cond_timedwait (this=0x7eff640e05d8, owner=0x7eff640e0540, abs_timeout=0x7effa83b2ce0, set_status_on_timeout=Unhandled dwarf expression opcode 0xf3) #4 MDL_wait::timed_wait (this=0x7eff640e05d8, owner=0x7eff640e0540, abs_timeout=0x7effa83b2ce0, set_status_on_timeout=Unhandled dwarf expression opcode 0xf3) #5 0x0000000000bd6048 in MDL_context::acquire_lock (this=0x7eff640e05d8, mdl_request=0x7eff640aa870, lock_wait_timeout=Unhandled dwarf expression opcode 0xf3) f 5跳转到 MDL_context::acquire_lockacquire_lock 函数参数中有 MDL_requestMDL_request::MDL_key 中有详细的锁信息p mdl_request->key{m_length = 34, m_db_name_length = 18, m_ptr = "\003performance_schema\000global_status", '\000'
上述信息可以看出,正在请求performance_schema.global_status这张表的锁
排查业务代码
和业务方确认,agent中确实执行了 “show global status” , 但是已经设置了autocommit
简化逻辑后,agent代码如下
import MySQLdbfrom time import sleepconn = MySQLdb.connect(host='47.93.49.119', port=3001, user='xx1')conn.autocommit = Truecur=conn.cursor()cur.execute("show global status")while 1: sleep(1)
代码中确实设置了autocommit,但是并没有生效(如果执行了commit,不可能不释放元数据锁)
MySQLdb.connect 返回 Connection 类,根据上述代码,autocommit是 Connection的成员属性
class Connection(_mysql.connection):
Connection 继承自_mysql.connection,_mysql 是c语言实现的python库,查看_mysql.c
static PyMethodDef _mysql_ConnectionObject_methods[] = { { "affected_rows", (PyCFunction)_mysql_ConnectionObject_affected_rows, METH_VARARGS, _mysql_ConnectionObject_affected_rows__doc__ }, { "autocommit", (PyCFunction)_mysql_ConnectionObject_autocommit, METH_VARARGS, _mysql_ConnectionObject_autocommit__doc__ }, { "commit", (PyCFunction)_mysql_ConnectionObject_commit, METH_VARARGS, _mysql_ConnectionObject_commit__doc__ },
autommit 并不是成员属性,而是一个成员方法
结论
conn.autocommit = True 强行将 autocommit 的函数指针赋值为 True,并没有真正设置autocommit
5.6中没有发现这个问题
一是 agent 中只有查询语句,不设autocommit也能返回查询结果
二是 5.6中 “show global status” 查询的是 information_shcema,5.7中是performance_schema,5.6中不会影响 drop database performance_schema
###########################################################
MDL(Meta Data LocK)的作用
在MySQL5.1及之前的版本中,如果有未提交的事务trx,当执行DROP/RENAME/ALTER TABLE RENAME操作时,不会被其他事务阻塞住。这会导致如下问题(MySQL bug#989)
master: 未提交的事务,但SQL已经完成(binlog也准备好了),表schema发生更改,在commit的时候不会被察觉到.
slave: 在binlog里是以事务提交顺序记录的,DDL隐式提交,因此在备库先执行DDL,后执行事务trx,由于trx作用的表已经发生了改变,因此trx会执行失败。 在DDL时的主库DML压力越大,这个问题触发的可能性就越高
在5.5引入了MDL(meta data lock)锁来解决在这个问题
MDL锁的类型
metadata lock也是一种锁。每个metadata lock都会定义锁住的对象,锁的持有时间和锁的类型
属性 | 范围 | 作用 |
GLOBAL | 全局锁 | 主要作用是防止DDL和写操作的过程中执行 set golbal_read_only =on 或flush tables with read lock; |
commit | 提交保护锁 | 主要作用是执行flush tables with read lock后,防止已经开始在执行的写事务提交 |
SCHEMA | 库锁 | 对象 |
TABLE | 表锁 | 对象 |
FUNCTION | 函数锁 | 对象 |
PROCEDURE | 存储过程锁 | 对象 |
TRIGGER | 触发器锁 | 对象 |
EVENT | 事件锁 | 对象 |
这些锁具有以下层级关系
MDL锁的简单示例
在实际工作中,最常见的MDL冲突就DDL的操作被没用提交的事务所阻塞。 我们下面通过一个具体的实例来演示DDL加MDL锁的过程。在这个实例中,利用gdb来跟踪DDL申请MDL锁的过程。
会话1:
mysql> create table ti(id int primary key, c1 int, key(c1)) engine=InnoDB stats_auto_recalc=default;Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.03 sec)mysql> insert into ti values (1,1), (2,2);Query OK, 2 rows affected (0.03 sec)Records: 2 Duplicates: 0 Warnings: 0mysql> start transaction;Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.00 sec)mysql> select * from ti;+----+------+| id | c1 |+----+------+| 1 | 1 || 2 | 2 |+----+------+2 rows in set (0.00 sec)
再开启第二个会话,利用gdb来跟踪mysql加MDL的过程 会话2:
[root@localhost mysql]# ps -ef|grep mysqlroot 3336 2390 0 06:33 pts/2 00:00:01 /u02/mysql/bin/mysqld --basedir=/u02/mysql/ --datadir=/u02/mysql/data --plugin-dir=/u02/mysql//lib/plugin --user=root --log-error=/u02/mysql/tmp/error1.log --open-files-limit=10240 --pid-file=/u02/mysql/tmp/mysql.pid --socket=/u02/mysql/tmp/mysql.sock --port=3306[root@localhost mysql]# gdb -p 3336----在GDB设置以下断点(gdb) b MDL_context::acquire_lockBreakpoint 1 at 0x730cab: file /u02/mysql-server-5.6/sql/mdl.cc, line 2187.(gdb) b lock_rec_lockBreakpoint 2 at 0xb5ef50: file /u02/mysql-server-5.6/storage/innobase/lock/lock0lock.cc, line 2296.(gdb) cContinuing.....
开启第三个会话
mysql> alter table ti stats_auto_recalc=1;这个操作被hang住
在会话2中执行下面的操作
(gdb) p mdl_request$1 = (MDL_request *) 0x7f697d1c3bd0(gdb) p *mdl_request$2 = {type = MDL_INTENTION_EXCLUSIVE, duration = MDL_STATEMENT, next_in_list = 0x7f697002a560, prev_in_list = 0x7f697d1c3df8, ticket = 0x0, key = {m_length = 3, m_db_name_length = 0, m_ptr = '\000'
从上面的输出中,我只能看到申请了一个语句级别的MDL_INTENTION_EXCLUSIVE。并没有看到什么其他有意义的信息。我们继续gdb跟踪
(gdb) p *(mdl_request->next_in_list)$3 = {type = MDL_INTENTION_EXCLUSIVE, duration = MDL_TRANSACTION, next_in_list = 0x7f697002a388, prev_in_list = 0x7f697d1c3bd8, ticket = 0x0, key = {m_length = 7, m_db_name_length = 4, m_ptr = "\001test\000\000\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217\217", static m_namespace_to_wait_state_name = {{m_key = 101, m_name = 0xf125a2 "Waiting for global read lock", m_flags = 0}, {m_key = 102, m_name = 0xf125c0 "Waiting for schema metadata lock", m_flags = 0}, {m_key = 103, m_name = 0xf125e8 "Waiting for table metadata lock", m_flags = 0}, {m_key = 104, m_name = 0xf12608 "Waiting for stored function metadata lock", m_flags = 0}, {m_key = 105, m_name = 0xf12638 "Waiting for stored procedure metadata lock", m_flags = 0}, {m_key = 106, m_name = 0xf12668 "Waiting for trigger metadata lock", m_flags = 0}, {m_key = 107, m_name = 0xf12690 "Waiting for event metadata lock", m_flags = 0}, {m_key = 108, m_name = 0xf126b0 "Waiting for commit lock", m_flags = 0}}}}
从上面的输出中,我们看到了需要在test(见输出中的 m_ptr = “\001test)数据库上加一把事务级的MDL_INTENTION_EXCLUSIVE锁。它并没有告诉我们最终的MDL会落在哪个对象上。我们继续跟踪
$4 = {type = MDL_SHARED_UPGRADABLE, duration = MDL_TRANSACTION, next_in_list = 0x0, prev_in_list = 0x7f697002a568, ticket = 0x0, key = {m_length = 9, m_db_name_length = 4, m_ptr = "\002test\000ti", '\000'
从上面的输出中,我们可以看出最终是要在test数据库的ti对象上加一把MDL_SHARED_UPGRADABLE锁。在做DDL时会先加MDL_SHARED_UPGRADABLE锁,然后升级到MDL_EXCLUSIVE锁
我来执行下面的过程 会话1
mysql> commit;Query OK, 0 rows affected (5.51 sec)
会话2
(gdb) p *mdl_request$5 = {type = MDL_EXCLUSIVE, duration = MDL_TRANSACTION, next_in_list = 0x20302000000, prev_in_list = 0x200000001, ticket = 0x0, key = {m_length = 9, m_db_name_length = 4, m_ptr = "\002test\000ti\000\000\000\000@\031\220\003\000\000\000\000\333\361\254\000\000\000\000\000\260<\034}i\177\000\000\302\362\254\000\000\000\000\000\300<\034}i\177\000\000\060|\002pi\177\000\000\320<\034}i\177\000\000\360\236\344\000\000\000\000\000\000\t\000pi\177\000\000(}\002pi\177\000\000\360<\034}i\177\000\000\234\312\344\000\000\000\000\000H\245\002pi\177\000\000\333\361\254\000\000\000\000\000\023\360\000\001", '\000'
从上面的输出中,我们看到了最终是在test.ti上申请了事务级别的MDL_EXCLUSIVE锁。
会话3
mysql> alter table ti stats_auto_recalc=1;Query OK, 0 rows affected (22 min 58.99 sec)Records: 0 Duplicates: 0 Warnings: 0
小结
本例只是简单的演示了,在同一个事务的不同时期加的不同的MDL的锁。MYSQL中DDL的操作不属于事务操作的范围。这就给mysql主备基于语句级别同步带来了困难。mysql主备在同步的过程中,为了保证主备结构一致性,而引入了MDL机制。为了尽可能的降低MDL带来的影响。请在业务低谷的时候,执行DDL操作。
版权声明:本文内容由网络用户投稿,版权归原作者所有,本站不拥有其著作权,亦不承担相应法律责任。如果您发现本站中有涉嫌抄袭或描述失实的内容,请联系我们jiasou666@gmail.com 处理,核实后本网站将在24小时内删除侵权内容。
发表评论
暂时没有评论,来抢沙发吧~