OLD | NEW |
(Empty) | |
| 1 The 5 states of an historical rollback lock as implemented by the |
| 2 xLock, xUnlock, and xCheckReservedLock methods of the sqlite3_io_methods |
| 3 objec are: |
| 4 |
| 5 UNLOCKED |
| 6 SHARED |
| 7 RESERVED |
| 8 PENDING |
| 9 EXCLUSIVE |
| 10 |
| 11 The wal-index file has a similar locking hierarchy implemented using |
| 12 the xShmLock method of the sqlite3_vfs object, but with 7 |
| 13 states. Each connection to a wal-index file must be in one of |
| 14 the following 7 states: |
| 15 |
| 16 UNLOCKED |
| 17 READ |
| 18 READ_FULL |
| 19 WRITE |
| 20 PENDING |
| 21 CHECKPOINT |
| 22 RECOVER |
| 23 |
| 24 These roughly correspond to the 5 states of a rollback lock except |
| 25 that SHARED is split out into 2 states: READ and READ_FULL and |
| 26 there is an extra RECOVER state used for wal-index reconstruction. |
| 27 |
| 28 The meanings of the various wal-index locking states is as follows: |
| 29 |
| 30 UNLOCKED - The wal-index is not in use. |
| 31 |
| 32 READ - Some prefix of the wal-index is being read. Additional |
| 33 wal-index information can be appended at any time. The |
| 34 newly appended content will be ignored by the holder of |
| 35 the READ lock. |
| 36 |
| 37 READ_FULL - The entire wal-index is being read. No new information |
| 38 can be added to the wal-index. The holder of a READ_FULL |
| 39 lock promises never to read pages from the database file |
| 40 that are available anywhere in the wal-index. |
| 41 |
| 42 WRITE - It is OK to append to the wal-index file and to adjust |
| 43 the header to indicate the new "last valid frame". |
| 44 |
| 45 PENDING - Waiting on all READ locks to clear so that a |
| 46 CHECKPOINT lock can be acquired. |
| 47 |
| 48 CHECKPOINT - It is OK to write any WAL data into the database file |
| 49 and zero the last valid frame field of the wal-index |
| 50 header. The wal-index file itself may not be changed |
| 51 other than to zero the last valid frame field in the |
| 52 header. |
| 53 |
| 54 RECOVER - Held during wal-index recovery. Used to prevent a |
| 55 race if multiple clients try to recover a wal-index at |
| 56 the same time. |
| 57 |
| 58 |
| 59 A particular lock manager implementation may coalesce one or more of |
| 60 the wal-index locking states, though with a reduction in concurrency. |
| 61 For example, an implemention might implement only exclusive locking, |
| 62 in which case all states would be equivalent to CHECKPOINT, meaning that |
| 63 only one reader or one writer or one checkpointer could be active at a |
| 64 time. Or, an implementation might combine READ and READ_FULL into |
| 65 a single state equivalent to READ, meaning that a writer could |
| 66 coexist with a reader, but no reader or writers could coexist with a |
| 67 checkpointer. |
| 68 |
| 69 The lock manager must obey the following rules: |
| 70 |
| 71 (1) A READ cannot coexist with CHECKPOINT. |
| 72 (2) A READ_FULL cannot coexist with WRITE. |
| 73 (3) None of WRITE, PENDING, CHECKPOINT, or RECOVER can coexist. |
| 74 |
| 75 The SQLite core will obey the next set of rules. These rules are |
| 76 assertions on the behavior of the SQLite core which might be verified |
| 77 during testing using an instrumented lock manager. |
| 78 |
| 79 (5) No part of the wal-index will be read without holding either some |
| 80 kind of SHM lock or an EXCLUSIVE lock on the original database. |
| 81 The original database is the file named in the 2nd parameter to |
| 82 the xShmOpen method. |
| 83 |
| 84 (6) A holder of a READ_FULL will never read any page of the database |
| 85 file that is contained anywhere in the wal-index. |
| 86 |
| 87 (7) No part of the wal-index other than the header will be written nor |
| 88 will the size of the wal-index grow without holding a WRITE or |
| 89 an EXCLUSIVE on the original database file. |
| 90 |
| 91 (8) The wal-index header will not be written without holding one of |
| 92 WRITE, CHECKPOINT, or RECOVER on the wal-index or an EXCLUSIVE on |
| 93 the original database files. |
| 94 |
| 95 (9) A CHECKPOINT or RECOVER must be held on the wal-index, or an |
| 96 EXCLUSIVE on the original database file, in order to reset the |
| 97 last valid frame counter in the header of the wal-index back to zero. |
| 98 |
| 99 (10) A WRITE can only increase the last valid frame pointer in the header. |
| 100 |
| 101 The SQLite core will only ever send requests for UNLOCK, READ, WRITE, |
| 102 CHECKPOINT, or RECOVER to the lock manager. The SQLite core will never |
| 103 request a READ_FULL or PENDING lock though the lock manager may deliver |
| 104 those locking states in response to READ and CHECKPOINT requests, |
| 105 respectively, if and only if the requested READ or CHECKPOINT cannot |
| 106 be delivered. |
| 107 |
| 108 The following are the allowed lock transitions: |
| 109 |
| 110 Original-State Request New-State |
| 111 -------------- ---------- ---------- |
| 112 (11a) UNLOCK READ READ |
| 113 (11b) UNLOCK READ READ_FULL |
| 114 (11c) UNLOCK CHECKPOINT PENDING |
| 115 (11d) UNLOCK CHECKPOINT CHECKPOINT |
| 116 (11e) READ UNLOCK UNLOCK |
| 117 (11f) READ WRITE WRITE |
| 118 (11g) READ RECOVER RECOVER |
| 119 (11h) READ_FULL UNLOCK UNLOCK |
| 120 (11i) READ_FULL WRITE WRITE |
| 121 (11j) READ_FULL RECOVER RECOVER |
| 122 (11k) WRITE READ READ |
| 123 (11l) PENDING UNLOCK UNLOCK |
| 124 (11m) PENDING CHECKPOINT CHECKPOINT |
| 125 (11n) CHECKPOINT UNLOCK UNLOCK |
| 126 (11o) RECOVER READ READ |
| 127 |
| 128 These 15 transitions are all that needs to be supported. The lock |
| 129 manager implementation can assert that fact. The other 27 possible |
| 130 transitions among the 7 locking states will never occur. |
OLD | NEW |