Rechercher dans le manuel MySQL

15.7.3 Locks Set by Different SQL Statements in InnoDB

A locking read, an UPDATE, or a DELETE generally set record locks on every index record that is scanned in the processing of the SQL statement. It does not matter whether there are WHERE conditions in the statement that would exclude the row. InnoDB does not remember the exact WHERE condition, but only knows which index ranges were scanned. The locks are normally next-key locks that also block inserts into the gap immediately before the record. However, gap locking can be disabled explicitly, which causes next-key locking not to be used. For more information, see Section 15.7.1, “InnoDB Locking”. The transaction isolation level also can affect which locks are set; see Section 15.7.2.1, “Transaction Isolation Levels”.

If a secondary index is used in a search and index record locks to be set are exclusive, InnoDB also retrieves the corresponding clustered index records and sets locks on them.

If you have no indexes suitable for your statement and MySQL must scan the entire table to process the statement, every row of the table becomes locked, which in turn blocks all inserts by other users to the table. It is important to create good indexes so that your queries do not unnecessarily scan many rows.

InnoDB sets specific types of locks as follows.

  • SELECT ... FROM is a consistent read, reading a snapshot of the database and setting no locks unless the transaction isolation level is set to SERIALIZABLE. For SERIALIZABLE level, the search sets shared next-key locks on the index records it encounters. However, only an index record lock is required for statements that lock rows using a unique index to search for a unique row.

  • SELECT ... FOR UPDATE and SELECT ... FOR SHARE statements that use a unique index acquire locks for scanned rows, and release the locks for rows that do not qualify for inclusion in the result set (for example, if they do not meet the criteria given in the WHERE clause). However, in some cases, rows might not be unlocked immediately because the relationship between a result row and its original source is lost during query execution. For example, in a UNION, scanned (and locked) rows from a table might be inserted into a temporary table before evaluation whether they qualify for the result set. In this circumstance, the relationship of the rows in the temporary table to the rows in the original table is lost and the latter rows are not unlocked until the end of query execution.

  • For locking reads (SELECT with FOR UPDATE or FOR SHARE), UPDATE, and DELETE statements, the locks that are taken depend on whether the statement uses a unique index with a unique search condition, or a range-type search condition.

    • For a unique index with a unique search condition, InnoDB locks only the index record found, not the gap before it.

    • For other search conditions, and for non-unique indexes, InnoDB locks the index range scanned, using gap locks or next-key locks to block insertions by other sessions into the gaps covered by the range. For information about gap locks and next-key locks, see Section 15.7.1, “InnoDB Locking”.

  • For index records the search encounters, SELECT ... FOR UPDATE blocks other sessions from doing SELECT ... FOR SHARE or from reading in certain transaction isolation levels. Consistent reads ignore any locks set on the records that exist in the read view.

  • UPDATE ... WHERE ... sets an exclusive next-key lock on every record the search encounters. However, only an index record lock is required for statements that lock rows using a unique index to search for a unique row.

  • When UPDATE modifies a clustered index record, implicit locks are taken on affected secondary index records. The UPDATE operation also takes shared locks on affected secondary index records when performing duplicate check scans prior to inserting new secondary index records, and when inserting new secondary index records.

  • DELETE FROM ... WHERE ... sets an exclusive next-key lock on every record the search encounters. However, only an index record lock is required for statements that lock rows using a unique index to search for a unique row.

  • INSERT sets an exclusive lock on the inserted row. This lock is an index-record lock, not a next-key lock (that is, there is no gap lock) and does not prevent other sessions from inserting into the gap before the inserted row.

    Prior to inserting the row, a type of gap lock called an insert intention gap lock is set. This lock signals the intent to insert in such a way that multiple transactions inserting into the same index gap need not wait for each other if they are not inserting at the same position within the gap. Suppose that there are index records with values of 4 and 7. Separate transactions that attempt to insert values of 5 and 6 each lock the gap between 4 and 7 with insert intention locks prior to obtaining the exclusive lock on the inserted row, but do not block each other because the rows are nonconflicting.

    If a duplicate-key error occurs, a shared lock on the duplicate index record is set. This use of a shared lock can result in deadlock should there be multiple sessions trying to insert the same row if another session already has an exclusive lock. This can occur if another session deletes the row. Suppose that an InnoDB table t1 has the following structure:

    Now suppose that three sessions perform the following operations in order:

    Session 1:

    Session 2:

    Session 3:

    Session 1:

    The first operation by session 1 acquires an exclusive lock for the row. The operations by sessions 2 and 3 both result in a duplicate-key error and they both request a shared lock for the row. When session 1 rolls back, it releases its exclusive lock on the row and the queued shared lock requests for sessions 2 and 3 are granted. At this point, sessions 2 and 3 deadlock: Neither can acquire an exclusive lock for the row because of the shared lock held by the other.

    A similar situation occurs if the table already contains a row with key value 1 and three sessions perform the following operations in order:

    Session 1:

    Session 2:

    Session 3:

    Session 1:

    The first operation by session 1 acquires an exclusive lock for the row. The operations by sessions 2 and 3 both result in a duplicate-key error and they both request a shared lock for the row. When session 1 commits, it releases its exclusive lock on the row and the queued shared lock requests for sessions 2 and 3 are granted. At this point, sessions 2 and 3 deadlock: Neither can acquire an exclusive lock for the row because of the shared lock held by the other.

  • INSERT ... ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE differs from a simple INSERT in that an exclusive lock rather than a shared lock is placed on the row to be updated when a duplicate-key error occurs. An exclusive index-record lock is taken for a duplicate primary key value. An exclusive next-key lock is taken for a duplicate unique key value.

  • REPLACE is done like an INSERT if there is no collision on a unique key. Otherwise, an exclusive next-key lock is placed on the row to be replaced.

  • INSERT INTO T SELECT ... FROM S WHERE ... sets an exclusive index record lock (without a gap lock) on each row inserted into T. If the transaction isolation level is READ COMMITTED, InnoDB does the search on S as a consistent read (no locks). Otherwise, InnoDB sets shared next-key locks on rows from S. InnoDB has to set locks in the latter case: During roll-forward recovery using a statement-based binary log, every SQL statement must be executed in exactly the same way it was done originally.

    CREATE TABLE ... SELECT ... performs the SELECT with shared next-key locks or as a consistent read, as for INSERT ... SELECT.

    When a SELECT is used in the constructs REPLACE INTO t SELECT ... FROM s WHERE ... or UPDATE t ... WHERE col IN (SELECT ... FROM s ...), InnoDB sets shared next-key locks on rows from table s.

  • While initializing a previously specified AUTO_INCREMENT column on a table, InnoDB sets an exclusive lock on the end of the index associated with the AUTO_INCREMENT column. In accessing the auto-increment counter, InnoDB uses a specific AUTO-INC table lock mode where the lock lasts only to the end of the current SQL statement, not to the end of the entire transaction. Other sessions cannot insert into the table while the AUTO-INC table lock is held; see Section 15.7.2, “InnoDB Transaction Model”.

    InnoDB fetches the value of a previously initialized AUTO_INCREMENT column without setting any locks.

  • If a FOREIGN KEY constraint is defined on a table, any insert, update, or delete that requires the constraint condition to be checked sets shared record-level locks on the records that it looks at to check the constraint. InnoDB also sets these locks in the case where the constraint fails.

  • LOCK TABLES sets table locks, but it is the higher MySQL layer above the InnoDB layer that sets these locks. InnoDB is aware of table locks if innodb_table_locks = 1 (the default) and autocommit = 0, and the MySQL layer above InnoDB knows about row-level locks.

    Otherwise, InnoDB's automatic deadlock detection cannot detect deadlocks where such table locks are involved. Also, because in this case the higher MySQL layer does not know about row-level locks, it is possible to get a table lock on a table where another session currently has row-level locks. However, this does not endanger transaction integrity, as discussed in Section 15.7.5.2, “Deadlock Detection and Rollback”. See also Section 15.6.1.6, “Limits on InnoDB Tables”.


Zoek in de MySQL-handleiding

Nederlandse vertaling

U hebt gevraagd om deze site in het Nederlands te bezoeken. Voor nu wordt alleen de interface vertaald, maar nog niet alle inhoud.

Als je me wilt helpen met vertalingen, is je bijdrage welkom. Het enige dat u hoeft te doen, is u op de site registreren en mij een bericht sturen waarin u wordt gevraagd om u toe te voegen aan de groep vertalers, zodat u de gewenste pagina's kunt vertalen. Een link onderaan elke vertaalde pagina geeft aan dat u de vertaler bent en heeft een link naar uw profiel.

Bij voorbaat dank.

Document heeft de 26/06/2006 gemaakt, de laatste keer de 26/10/2018 gewijzigd
Bron van het afgedrukte document:https://www.gaudry.be/nl/mysql-rf-innodb-locks-set.html

De infobrol is een persoonlijke site waarvan de inhoud uitsluitend mijn verantwoordelijkheid is. De tekst is beschikbaar onder CreativeCommons-licentie (BY-NC-SA). Meer info op de gebruiksvoorwaarden en de auteur.

Referenties

  1. Bekijk - html-document Taal van het document:en Manuel MySQL : https://dev.mysql.com/

Deze verwijzingen en links verwijzen naar documenten die geraadpleegd zijn tijdens het schrijven van deze pagina, of die aanvullende informatie kunnen geven, maar de auteurs van deze bronnen kunnen niet verantwoordelijk worden gehouden voor de inhoud van deze pagina.
De auteur Deze site is als enige verantwoordelijk voor de manier waarop de verschillende concepten, en de vrijheden die met de referentiewerken worden genomen, hier worden gepresenteerd. Vergeet niet dat u meerdere broninformatie moet doorgeven om het risico op fouten te verkleinen.

Inhoudsopgave Haut