Breaking down #5899 into smaller PR-s
This particular PR changes the way TRUNCATE acquires distributed locks on the relations it is truncating to use the LOCK command instead of lock_relation_if_exists. This has the benefit of using pg's recursive locking logic it implements for the LOCK command instead of us having to resolve relation dependencies and lock them explicitly. While this does not directly affect truncate, it will allow us to generalize this locking logic to then log different relations where the pg recursive locking will become useful (e.g. locking views).
This implementation is a bit more complex that it needs to be due to pg not supporting locking foreign tables. We can however, still lock foreign tables with lock_relation_if_exists. So for a command:
TRUNCATE dist_table_1, dist_table_2, foreign_table_1, foreign_table_2, dist_table_3;
We generate and send the following command to all the workers in metadata:
```sql
SEL citus.enable_ddl_propagation TO FALSE;
LOCK dist_table_1, dist_table_2 IN ACCESS EXCLUSIVE MODE;
SELECT lock_relation_if_exists('foreign_table_1', 'ACCESS EXCLUSIVE');
SELECT lock_relation_if_exists('foreign_table_2', 'ACCESS EXCLUSIVE');
LOCK dist_table_3 IN ACCESS EXCLUSIVE MODE;
SEL citus.enable_ddl_propagation TO TRUE;
```
Note that we need to alternate between the lock command and lock_table_if_exists in order to preserve the TRUNCATE order of relations.
When pg supports locking foreign tables, we will be able to massive simplify this logic and send a single LOCK command.
(cherry picked from commit 4c6f62efc6)
Adds support for propagation ALTER VIEW commands to
- Change owner of view
- SET/RESET option
- Rename view and view's column name
- Change schema of the view
Since PG also supports targeting views with ALTER TABLE
commands, related code also added to direct such ALTER TABLE
commands to ALTER VIEW commands while sending them to workers.
Adds support for propagating create/drop view commands and views to
worker node while scaling out the cluster. Since views are dropped while
converting the table type, metadata connection will be used while
propagating view commands to not switch to sequential mode.
With Citus MX enabled, when a reference table is modified, it does
some operations on the first worker node(e.g., acquire locks).
If node metadata is locked (via add node or create restore point),
the changes to the reference tables should be blocked.
First, it is not needed. Second, in the past we had issues regarding
this: https://github.com/citusdata/citus/pull/4344
When I create 10k tables, ~120K shards, this saves
40Mb of memory during ALTER EXTENSION citus UPDATE.
Before the change: MetadataCacheMemoryContext: 41943040 ~ 40MB
After the change: MetadataCacheMemoryContext: 8192
(cherry picked from commit f193e16a01)
In the past, for all modifications on the local execution,
we enabled 2PC (with 6a7ed7b309).
This also required us to enable coordinated transactions
via https://github.com/citusdata/citus/pull/4831 .
However, it does have a very substantial impact on the
distributed deadlock detection. The distributed deadlock
detection is designed to avoid single-statement transactions
because they cannot lead to any actual deadlocks.
The implementation is to skip backends without distributed
transactions are assigned. Now that we assign single
statement local executions in the lock graphs, we are
conflicting with the design of distributed deadlock
detection.
In general, we should fix it. However, one might
think that it is not a big deal, even if the processes
show up in the lock graphs, the deadlock detection
should not be causing any false positives. That is
false, unless https://github.com/citusdata/citus/issues/1803
is fixed. Now that local processes are considered as a single
distributed backend, the lock graphs might find:
local execution 1 [tx id: 1] -> any local process [tx id: 0]
any local process [tx id: 0] -> local execution 2 [tx id: 2]
And, decides that there is a distributed deadlock.
This commit is:
(a) right thing to do, as local execuion should not need any
distributed tx id
(b) Eliminates performance issues that might come up with
deadlock detection does a lot of unncessary checks
(c) After moving local execution after the remote execution
via https://github.com/citusdata/citus/pull/4301, the
vauge requirement for assigning distributed tx ids are
already gone.
(cherry picked from commit a2debe0f02)
The aim of hiding shards is to hide shards from client applications.
Certain bg workers (such as pg_cron or Citus maintanince daemon)
should be treated like client applications because users can run
queries from such bg workers. And, these bg workers should follow
the similar application_name checks as client backeends.
Certain other bg workers, such as logical replication or postgres'
parallel workers, should never hide shards. They are internal
operations.
Similarly the other backend types like the walsender or
checkpointer or autovacuum should never hide shards.
(cherry picked from commit 9043a1ed3f)
We've had custom versions of Postgres its `foreach` macro which with a
hidden ListCell for quite some time now. People like these custom
macros, because they are easier to use and require less boilerplate.
This adds similar custom versions of Postgres its `forboth` macro. Now
you don't need ListCells anymore when looping over two lists at the same
time.
Marco Slot
gledis69
Gledis Zeneli
Burak Velioglu
Ahmet Gedemenli
Onder Kalaci
Nils Dijk
Hanefi Onaldi
Halil Ozan Akgül
Jelte Fennema
Burak Velioglu
Marco Slot