[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4437?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Rick Hillegas updated DERBY-4437:
---------------------------------

    Attachment: derby-4437-03-aa-upgradeTest.diff

Attaching derby-4437-03-aa-upgradeTest.diff. This patch adds an upgrade test 
case to verify that identity columns function correctly across upgrade and 
downgrade. Committed at subversion revision 1136036.

Touches the following files:

A      
java/testing/org/apache/derbyTesting/functionTests/tests/upgradeTests/Changes10_9.java
M      
java/testing/org/apache/derbyTesting/functionTests/tests/upgradeTests/UpgradeRun.java


> Concurrent inserts into table with identity column perform poorly
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-4437
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4437
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: SQL
>    Affects Versions: 10.5.3.0
>            Reporter: Knut Anders Hatlen
>            Assignee: Rick Hillegas
>         Attachments: derby-4437-01-aj-allTestsPass.diff, 
> derby-4437-02-ac-alterTable-bulkImport-deferredInsert.diff, 
> derby-4437-03-aa-upgradeTest.diff
>
>
> I have a multi-threaded application which is very insert-intensive. I've 
> noticed that it sometimes can come into a state where it slows down 
> considerably and basically becomes single-threaded. This is especially 
> harmful on modern multi-core machines since most of the available resources 
> are left idle.
> The problematic tables contain identity columns, and here's my understanding 
> of what happens:
> 1) Identity columns are generated from a counter that's stored in a row in 
> SYS.SYSCOLUMNS. During normal operation, the counter is maintained in a 
> nested transaction within the transaction that performs the insert. This 
> allows the nested transaction to commit the changes to SYS.SYSCOLUMN 
> separately from the main transaction, and the exclusive lock that it needs to 
> obtain on the row holding the counter, can be releases after a relatively 
> short time. Concurrent transactions can therefore insert into the same table 
> at the same time, without needing to wait for the others to commit or abort.
> 2) However, if the nested transaction cannot lock the row in SYS.SYSCOLUMNS 
> immediately, it will give up and retry the operation in the main transaction. 
> This prevents self-deadlocks in the case where the main transaction already 
> owns a lock on SYS.SYSCOLUMNS. Unfortunately, this also increases the time 
> the row is locked, since the exclusive lock cannot be released until the main 
> transaction commits. So as soon as there is one lock collision, the waiting 
> transaction changes to a locking mode that increases the chances of others 
> having to wait, which seems to result in all insert threads having to obtain 
> the SYSCOLUMNS locks in the main transaction. The end result is that only one 
> of the insert threads can execute at any given time as long as the 
> application is in this state.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

Reply via email to