MySQLInnoDB四个事务级别与脏读、不重复读、幻读(二)

2015-02-02 23:03:10 · 作者: · 浏览: 30
s。所以120s到了就报错HY000错误。

SERIALIZABLE是相当严格的串行化执行模式,不管是读还是写,都会影响其他读取相同的表的事务。是严格的表级读写排他锁。也就失去了innodb引擎的优点。实际应用很少。

实验四:幻读?

一些文章写到InnoDB的可重复读避免了“幻读”(phantom read),这个说法并不准确。

做个试验:(以下所有试验要注意存储引擎和隔离级别)

mysql>show create table t_bitfly\G;
CREATE TABLE `t_bitfly` (
`id` bigint(20) NOT NULL default '0',
`value` varchar(32) default NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`id`)
) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=gbk

mysql>select @@global.tx_isolation, @@tx_isolation;
+-----------------------+-----------------+
| @@global.tx_isolation | @@tx_isolation |
+-----------------------+-----------------+
| REPEATABLE-READ | REPEATABLE-READ |
+-----------------------+-----------------+

试验4-1:

tSessionA Session B
|
| START TRANSACTION; START TRANSACTION;
|
| SELECT * FROM t_bitfly;
| empty set
| INSERT INTO t_bitfly VALUES (1, 'a');
|
|
| SELECT * FROM t_bitfly;
| empty set
| COMMIT;
|
| SELECT * FROM t_bitfly;
| empty set
|
| INSERT INTO t_bitfly VALUES (1, 'a');
| ERROR 1062 (23000):
| Duplicate entry '1' for key 1
v (shit, 刚刚明明告诉我没有这条记录的)

如此就出现了幻读,以为表里没有数据,其实数据已经存在了,傻乎乎的提交后,才发现数据冲突了。

试验4-2:

tSessionA Session B
|
| START TRANSACTION; START TRANSACTION;
|
| SELECT * FROM t_bitfly;
| +------+-------+
| | id | value |
| +------+-------+
| | 1 |a |
| +------+-------+
| INSERT INTO t_bitfly VALUES (2, 'b');
|
|
| SELECT * FROM t_bitfly;
| +------+-------+
| | id | value |
| +------+-------+
| | 1 |a |
| +------+-------+
| COMMIT;
|
| SELECT * FROM t_bitfly;
| +------+-------+
| | id | value |
| +------+-------+
| | 1 |a |
| +------+-------+
|
| UPDATE t_bitfly SET value='z';
| Rows matched: 2 Changed:2 Warnings: 0
| (怎么多出来一行)
|
| SELECT * FROM t_bitfly;
| +------+-------+
| | id | value |
| +------+-------+
| | 1 |z |
| | 2 |z |
| +------+-------+
|
v

本事务中第一次读取出一行,做了一次更新后,另一个事务里提交的数据就出现了。也可以看做是一种幻读。

------

那么,InnoDB指出的可以避免幻读是怎么回事呢?

http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/innodb-record-level-locks.html

By default, InnoDB operatesin REPEATABLE READ transaction isolation level and with the innodb_locks_unsafe_for_binlogsystem variable disabled. In this case, InnoDB uses next-key locks for searchesand index scans, which prevents phantom rows (see Section 13.6.8.5, “Avoidingthe Phantom Problem Using Next-Key Locking”).

准备的理解是,当隔离级别是可重复读,且禁用innodb_locks_unsafe_for_binlog的情况下,在搜索和扫描index的时候使用的next-keylocks可以避免幻读。

关键点在于,是InnoDB默认对一个普通的查询也会加next-key locks,还是说需要应用自己来加锁呢?如果单看这一句,可能会以为InnoDB对普通的查询也加了锁,如果是,那和序列化(SERIALIZABLE)的区别又在哪里呢?

MySQL manual里还有一段:

13.2.8.5. Avoiding the PhantomProblem Using Next-Key Locking (http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/innodb-next-key-locking.html)

Toprevent phantoms, InnoDB usesan algorithm called next-key locking that combinesindex-row locking with gap locking.

Youcan use next-key locking to implement a uniqueness check in your application:If you read your data in share mode and do not see a duplicate for a row youare going to insert, then you can safely insert your row and know that thenext-key lock set on the successor of your row during the read prevents anyonemeanwhile inserting a duplicate for your row. Thus, the next-key lockingenables you to “lock” the nonexistence of something in your table.

我的理解是说,InnoDB提供了next-key locks,但需要应用程序自己去加锁。manual里提供一个例子:

SELECT * FROM child WHERE id> 100 FOR UPDATE;

这样,InnoDB会给id大于100的行(假如child表里有一行id为102),以及100-102,102+的gap都加上锁。

可以使用showinnodb status来查看是否给表加上了锁。

再看一个实验,要注意,表t_bitfly里的id为主键字段。

实验4-3:

t SessionA Se