Hi!
On Jul 10, eugene@stripped wrote:
> ChangeSet@stripped, 2007-07-10 00:48:08+04:00, evgen@stripped +9 -0
> Bug#24989: The DEADLOCK error is improperly handled by InnoDB.
>
> When innodb detects a deadlock it calls ha_rollback_trans() to
> rollback the main transaction. But such action isn't allowed from
> inside of triggers and functions. When it happen the 'Explicit or
> implicit commit' error is thrown even if there is no commit/rollback
> statements in the trigger/function. This leads to the user
> confusion.
>
> Now the convert_error_code_to_mysql() function doesn't call the
> ha_rollback_trans() function directly but rather calls the
> mark_transaction_to_rollback function and returns an error. The
> sp_rcontext::find_handler() now doesn't allow errors to be caught by
> the trigger/function error handlers when the
> thd->is_fatal_sub_stmt_error flag is set. Procedures are still
> allowed to catch such errors. The sp_rcontext::find_handler
> function now accepts a THD handle as a parameter. The
> transaction_rollback_request and the is_fatal_sub_stmt_error flags
> are added to the THD class. The are initialized by the THD class
> constructor. Now the mysql_execute_command function resets the
> THD::is_fatal_sub_stmt_error flag. Now the
> ha_autocommit_or_rollback function rolls back main transaction when
> not in a sub statement and the thd->transaction_rollback_request is
> set.
> --- 1.621/sql/sql_parse.cc 2007-05-15 13:56:04 +04:00
> +++ 1.622/sql/sql_parse.cc 2007-07-09 23:54:20 +04:00
> @@ -5107,6 +5107,8 @@ create_sp_error:
> if (thd->one_shot_set && lex->sql_command != SQLCOM_SET_OPTION)
> reset_one_shot_variables(thd);
>
> + if (!thd->in_sub_stmt)
> + thd->is_fatal_sub_stmt_error= FALSE;
No, this is wrong.
Why to check thd->spcont after every statement ?
It can never change here. It changes inside the statement and is
restored immediately after executing the routine - in
sp_head::execute_function and sp_head::execute_trigger.
Also, note that it's also set and reset in sp_head::execute_procedure,
but in the precedure we're *not* in the sub-statement, even if
thd->spcont is set.
You should not need to check thd->spcont. The flag you want to reset is
about *sub_stmt*, so you need to check thd->in_sub_stmt. And do it where
it's changed (THD::restore_sub_statement_state), not after every
statement.
> --- 1.21/mysql-test/r/innodb_mysql.result 2007-05-16 00:10:55 +04:00
> +++ 1.22/mysql-test/r/innodb_mysql.result 2007-07-09 23:52:27 +04:00
.....
> +select @a,@b;
> +@a @b
> +exception deadlock
Why both handlers were triggered ?
As far as I understand, one event should never trigger two handlers.
Regards / Mit vielen Grüssen,
Sergei
--
__ ___ ___ ____ __
/ |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ / Sergei Golubchik <serg@stripped>
/ /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ Principal Software Developer
/_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL GmbH, Radlkoferstr. 2, D-81373 München
<___/ Geschäftsführer: Kaj Arnö - HRB
München 162140
