Andrei Elkin <andrei.elkin@mariadb.com> writes:

Kristian Nielsen <knielsen@knielsen-hq.org> writes:

...

You need to make sure that --slave_exec_mode=IDEMPOTENT is not used. Otherwise you can get silent data corruption.

IDEMPOTENT is always risky. Here it would add up another bit, in the parallel mode.

What do you mean "IDEMPOTENT is always risky"? As far as I know, if the slave would replicate without error in STRICT, it will replicate exactly the same way in IDEMPOTENT. Only if there is an error in STRICT mode will the IDEMPOTENT mode do something different (ignore the error in some cases). So the risk is that we might fail to detect that the slave is diverged from the master, right? Note that diverged slave can be undetected even in STRICT mode in many cases.

Btw should IDEMPOTENT be disallowed in the parallel mode actually?

No, why? IDEMPOTENT should work just as documented in all parallel replication modes. Or do you know of any bug with IDEMPOTENT and optimistic parallel replication that I don't know of? If so do you have a test case? The optimistic parallel replication should work correctly with IDEMPOTENT, since the second query that's ignoring the error should still be taking InnoDB row locks, which will conflict as normal with the first transaction and cause the second to be retried, this time without (ignored) error. I just tried with the below testcase, it seems to work. Only when you fiddle with the InnoDB locking like in your patch and ignore certain locks, do you get problems, and then you can end up with a later transaction completely ignoring a lock that is temporarily held by an earlier XA PREPARE (even though the corresponding XA COMMIT is also earlier). And this will result in incorrect replication and diverged slave, I think (I did not test). This is not "risky", this is incorrect behaviour and a serious bug. So it seems you will need to maybe give an error when replicating any XA transaction if slave_exec_mode=IDEMPOTENT? Or handle it some other way to avoid silently replicating incorrectly. As you know, my opinion is that this is just yet another symptom of the real issue of MDEV-32020, but I know you're going to ignore that. So I've given up caring about what happens to XA replication, as long as it doesn't negatively affect non-XA stuff.

I just don't see any its usefullness except creating a chaotic state.

Why do you think it creates a "chaotic state"? - Kristian. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --source include/have_innodb.inc --source include/have_binlog_format_row.inc --source include/master-slave.inc --connection master CALL mtr.add_suppression("Can't find record in 't1'"); ALTER TABLE mysql.gtid_slave_pos ENGINE=InnoDB; CREATE TABLE t1 (a INT PRIMARY KEY, b INT) ENGINE=InnoDB; CREATE TABLE t2 (a INT PRIMARY KEY) ENGINE=InnoDB; BEGIN; INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (1, 1); INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (2, 1); INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (3, 1); INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (4, 1); INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (5, 1); COMMIT; --sync_slave_with_master --source include/stop_slave.inc SET @old_exec_mode= @@GLOBAL.slave_exec_mode; SET GLOBAL slave_exec_mode=IDEMPOTENT; SET @old_parallel_mode= @@GLOBAL.slave_parallel_mode; SET GLOBAL slave_parallel_mode= optimistic; SET @old_threads= @@GLOBAL.slave_parallel_threads; SET GLOBAL slave_parallel_threads= 8; --source include/start_slave.inc # Block certain queries on the slave temporarily. BEGIN; INSERT INTO t2 VALUES (1), (2), (3); --connection master UPDATE t1 SET b=10 WHERE a=1; BEGIN; INSERT INTO t2 VALUES (1); # A DELETE to make room for a later INSERT, will be delayed a bit on slave. DELETE FROM t1 WHERE a=2; COMMIT; UPDATE t1 SET b=20 WHERE a=3; BEGIN; INSERT INTO t2 VALUES (2); # An INSERT to be deleted again shortly, will be delayed a bit on slave. INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (6,2); COMMIT; UPDATE t1 SET b=30 WHERE a=4; # This INSERT cannot run until after the earlier DELETE. INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (2, 1); # This DELETE cannot run until after the earlier INSERT. DELETE FROM t1 WHERE a=6; SELECT * FROM t1 ORDER BY a; --save_master_pos --connection slave --sleep 1 ROLLBACK; --sync_with_master SELECT * FROM t1 ORDER BY a; --source include/stop_slave.inc SET GLOBAL slave_exec_mode= @old_exec_mode; SET GLOBAL slave_parallel_mode= @old_parallel_mode; SET GLOBAL slave_parallel_threads= @old_threads; --source include/start_slave.inc --connection master DROP TABLE t1, t2; --source include/rpl_end.inc