-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/36895/
-----------------------------------------------------------
(Updated Aug. 5, 2015, 9:22 a.m.)
Review request for Ambari, Alejandro Fernandez, Nate Cole, Robert Levas, Robert
Nettleton, and Sumit Mohanty.
Bugs: AMBARI-12570
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMBARI-12570
Repository: ambari
Description (updated)
-------
Similar to AMBARI-12526, Ambari installation via a blueprint on SQL Azure gets
stuck somewhere between 90% and 100% because of a SQL Database deadlock.
- We have dual X-locks on hostcomponentstate asking for U-locks when updating
the CLUSTERED INDEX.
- Both dual X-locks, from different transactions and different processes, are
on the same row (technically impossible) - based on the XML execution plan, we
can see that the concurrent UPDATE statements are executing on different rows
due to their CLUSTERED INDEX predicate.
- In Java, Ambari has locks which prevent concurrent U- or X-locks on the same
row
- Only happens on SQL Server
There are two issues that have been identified as contributing to the problem:
- With compound primary keys where most of the columns are the same, SQL Server
does run into key lock (hash) collisions.
- When using a compound PK to query, the first column in the index is used to
perform the initial b-tree seek. This was the cluster ID. Since every row has
the same cluster ID, the entire table was being locked to perform the update on
a single row.
The solution was to move away from the compound PK and use a surrogate long ID
instead for the PK.
Diffs
-----
ambari-server/src/main/java/org/apache/ambari/server/orm/dao/HostComponentStateDAO.java
fb585fd
ambari-server/src/main/java/org/apache/ambari/server/orm/entities/HostComponentStateEntity.java
45e036b
ambari-server/src/main/java/org/apache/ambari/server/orm/entities/HostComponentStateEntityPK.java
86e0dee
ambari-server/src/main/java/org/apache/ambari/server/state/svccomphost/ServiceComponentHostImpl.java
0850a79
ambari-server/src/main/java/org/apache/ambari/server/upgrade/AbstractUpgradeCatalog.java
edb1606
ambari-server/src/main/java/org/apache/ambari/server/upgrade/UpgradeCatalog220.java
4eb7a80
ambari-server/src/main/resources/Ambari-DDL-MySQL-CREATE.sql 1b67b24
ambari-server/src/main/resources/Ambari-DDL-Oracle-CREATE.sql 16f6a0a
ambari-server/src/main/resources/Ambari-DDL-Postgres-CREATE.sql cd6e27a
ambari-server/src/main/resources/Ambari-DDL-Postgres-EMBEDDED-CREATE.sql
c7138be
ambari-server/src/main/resources/Ambari-DDL-SQLServer-CREATE.sql 0ff1aff
ambari-server/src/test/java/org/apache/ambari/server/state/ServiceComponentTest.java
96bbb1d
ambari-server/src/test/java/org/apache/ambari/server/state/cluster/ClustersTest.java
ce1fd34
ambari-server/src/test/java/org/apache/ambari/server/state/svccomphost/ServiceComponentHostTest.java
f6ab0ec
ambari-server/src/test/java/org/apache/ambari/server/upgrade/UpgradeCatalog170Test.java
93f7f8c
ambari-server/src/test/java/org/apache/ambari/server/upgrade/UpgradeCatalog200Test.java
484c18d
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/36895/diff/
Testing
-------
Deployed numerous clusters on PostgresSQL, SQL Server, and MySQL using both the
Ambari UI and blueprints. Upgraded a 2.1 database on PostgresSQL, Oracle,
MySQL, and SQL Server to verify that changes to the `hostcomponentstate` table
were good.
Thanks,
Jonathan Hurley
