Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add RPC to read the statements to be executed in an unresolved prepared transaction #17131

Merged

Conversation

GuptaManan100
Copy link
Member

@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 commented Nov 1, 2024

Description

This PR adds a new RPC and vtctldclient command to read a transaction's status if it is still unresolved. This new RPC will also show the commands that were part of the transaction on each of the participating shards that have failures. This is going to be quite useful for users to be able to fix the problem before concluding the transaction.

The next steps are to add the plumbing for vtadmin to also use this new command and show it on the UI when requested. That work will be done in a follow up PR.

Related Issue(s)

Checklist

  • "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported to release branches
  • If this change is to be back-ported to previous releases, a justification is included in the PR description
  • Tests were added or are not required
  • Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on CI?
  • Documentation was added or is not required

Deployment Notes

Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Nov 1, 2024

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

  • Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

  • Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
  • New features should be documented.
  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
  • There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

  • Is this flag really necessary?
  • Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

  • Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
  • If the workflow needs to be marked as required, the maintainer team must be notified.

Backward compatibility

  • Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
  • Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
  • RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
  • If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from vitess-operator and arewefastyet, if used there.
  • vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.

@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot added NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels Nov 1, 2024
@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 added release notes (needs details) This PR needs to be listed in the release notes in a dedicated section (deprecation notice, etc...) and removed NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required labels Nov 1, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v22.0.0 milestone Nov 1, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 1, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 45.83333% with 130 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 67.41%. Comparing base (1e2f15b) to head (e0cbfc7).
Report is 13 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
go/vt/vttablet/tabletserver/twopc.go 11.53% 46 Missing ⚠️
go/cmd/vtctldclient/command/transactions.go 10.00% 27 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vttablet/tabletserver/tabletserver.go 0.00% 11 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtctl/grpcvtctldserver/server.go 85.50% 10 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vttablet/tabletmanager/rpc_transaction.go 0.00% 7 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtctl/grpcvtctldclient/client_gen.go 0.00% 5 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vttablet/tabletserver/dt_executor.go 0.00% 5 Missing ⚠️
...t/vtctl/grpcvtctldserver/testutil/test_tmclient.go 55.55% 4 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtcombo/tablet_map.go 0.00% 3 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vttablet/faketmclient/fake_client.go 0.00% 3 Missing ⚠️
... and 4 more
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #17131      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.43%   67.41%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files        1571     1569       -2     
  Lines      252184   252410     +226     
==========================================
+ Hits       170059   170160     +101     
- Misses      82125    82250     +125     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 marked this pull request as ready for review November 4, 2024 11:22
@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 removed release notes (needs details) This PR needs to be listed in the release notes in a dedicated section (deprecation notice, etc...) NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work labels Nov 4, 2024
@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 added Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature) Component: Query Serving Component: vtctldclient labels Nov 4, 2024
Comment on lines -2460 to 2461
shardTrnxs, err := s.tmc.GetUnresolvedTransactions(newCtx, primary.Tablet)
shardTrnxs, err := s.tmc.GetUnresolvedTransactions(newCtx, primary.Tablet, req.AbandonAge)
if err != nil {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nice catch ❤️

Comment on lines +2570 to +2577
eg, newCtx := errgroup.WithContext(ctx)
eg.SetLimit(10)
for _, rm := range transaction.Participants {
eg.Go(func() error {
primary, err := s.getPrimaryTablet(newCtx, rm)
if err != nil {
return err
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

we should collect from all shards irrespective of the error from some shards and return to the caller.

Copy link
Member

@harshit-gangal harshit-gangal Nov 5, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We might have to do this for other commands as well.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's do that as a follow up. We'll need to add tests for that too.

@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 merged commit d9ab9f7 into vitessio:main Nov 8, 2024
101 checks passed
@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 deleted the read-all-transaction-data-rpc branch November 8, 2024 06:09
rvrangel pushed a commit to rvrangel/vitess that referenced this pull request Nov 21, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Component: Query Serving Component: vtctldclient Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants