[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4279?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12882166#action_12882166
 ] 

Knut Anders Hatlen commented on DERBY-4279:
-------------------------------------------

I haven't studied the details of this code yet, but the synchronization on 
getConnectionSynchronization() is probably not enough to ensure safe access to 
the GenericPreparedStatement. getConnectionSynchronization() is used to ensure 
that a single connection cannot be executing in two threads at the same time, 
but one GenericPreparedStatement can be shared between multiple connections.

Assuming this is the same issue as DERBY-3823/DERBY-1635 and it is 
getActivationClass() that returns null, it looks like getMetaData() must have 
been called when the statement was being recompiled by another thread, and that 
thread had already called preparedStatement.setActivationClass(null) in 
GenericPreparedStatement.prepMinion(). I'm not sure if more synchronization is 
what's needed to fix this bug, or if the code just needs to handle null 
returned from getActivationClass(), or perhaps both.

> Statement cache deadlock
> ------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-4279
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4279
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: SQL
>    Affects Versions: 10.0.2.1, 10.1.3.1, 10.2.2.0, 10.3.3.0, 10.4.2.0, 
> 10.5.1.1
>         Environment: Windows Vista
>            Reporter: Jeff Stuckman
>            Assignee: Brett Wooldridge
>             Fix For: 10.7.0.0
>
>         Attachments: Derby4279.java, patch4279.txt, stacktrace.txt
>
>
> Due to a design flaw in the statement cache, a deadlock can occur if a 
> prepared statement becomes out-of-date.
> I will illustrate this with the following example:
> The application is using the embedded Derby driver. The application has two 
> threads, and each thread uses its own connection.
> There is a table named MYTABLE with column MYCOLUMN.
> 1. A thread prepares and executes the query SELECT MYCOLUMN FROM MYTABLE. The 
> prepared statement is stored in the statement cache (see 
> org.apache.derby.impl.sql.GenericStatement for this logic)
> 2. After some time, the prepared statement becomes invalid or out-of-date for 
> some reason (see org.apache.derby.impl.sql.GenericPreparedStatement)
> 3. Thread 1 begins a transaction and executes LOCK TABLE MYTABLE IN EXCLUSIVE 
> MODE
> 4. Thread 2 begins a transaction and executes SELECT MYCOLUMN FROM MYTABLE. 
> The statement is in the statement cache but it is out-of-date. The thread 
> begins to recompile the statement. To compile the statement, the thread needs 
> a shared lock on MYTABLE. Thread 1 already has an exclusive lock on MYTABLE. 
> Thread 2 waits.
> 5. Thread 1 executes SELECT MYCOLUMN FROM MYTABLE. The statement is in the 
> statement cache but it is being compiled. Thread 1 waits on the statement's 
> monitor.
> 6. We have a deadlock. Derby eventually detects a lock timeout, but the error 
> message is not descriptive. The stacks at the time of the deadlock are:
> This deadlock is unique because it can still occur in a properly designed 
> database. You are only safe if all of your transactions are very simple and 
> cannot be interleaved in a sequence that causes the deadlock, or if your 
> particular statements do not require a table lock to compile. (For the sake 
> of simplicity, I used LOCK TABLE in my example, but any UPDATE statement 
> would fit.)

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to