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

release-22.2: *: add restriction to running DDL with internal executors #88287

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Sep 20, 2022

Conversation

blathers-crl[bot]
Copy link

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot commented Sep 20, 2022

Backport 9/9 commits from #86334 on behalf of @ZhouXing19.

/cc @cockroachdb/release


The current internal executor has its lifecycle, which makes it erroneous
when being used to execute DDL statements if under an outer txn.

In this commit, we

  1. Migrated the existing DDLs with internal executor with not-nil txn to either
    descs.CollectionFactory.TxnWithExecutor() or planner.WithInternalExecutor().
    Only internal executors inited via these 2 interfaces are bounded with txn-related
    metadata, and hence are allowed to run DDLs in a transactional manner.
  2. Added a restriction for running DDLs with internal executor only if it's bound with
    txn-related metadata.

fixes #87281

Release justification: bug fix for the internal executor
Release note: none


Release justification:

This is part of the migration of existing DDL statement with internal executor
to `descs.CollectionFactory.TxnWithExecutor()`. DDL statements should only be
run with an internal executor that's created via this function.

Release justification: Low risk, high benefit changes to existing functionality
Release note: none
fixes #76764

Release justification: Low risk, high benefit changes to existing functionality
Release note: none
…r()` for DDLs

This is part of the project to migrate existing DDL statements running with
an internal executor to `descs.CollectionFactory()`. DDLs are only allowed
to run with internal executor inited via this function.

Release justification: Low risk, high benefit changes to existing functionality
Release note: None
…tor()` for DDLs

This commit is to migrate the existing DDLs to using
`planner.WithInternalExecutor()`. DDLs with internal executors are only allowed
if the latter is bounded with txn-realated metadata.

Release justification: Low risk, high benefit changes to existing functionality
Release note: none
…tor()` for DDLs

This commit is part of the project to migrate DDLs running with internal executor
with the correct interface. DDLs are only allowed to run with internal executor
that is bound to txn-related metadata.

Release justification: Low risk, high benefit changes to existing functionality
Release note: none
We stripped `txn` from the parameter list in `cleanupTempSystemTables()`.
It was run with not-nil txn by mistake, which is a mis-usage of running
internal executor with DDLs.

Release justification: bug fix
Release note: none
This is another DDL statement executed via an internal executor mal-inited.
Change it to use the right interface.

Release justification:
Release note: none.
…tor with txn

When using internal executor to run DDL statements under a not-nil outer txn,
we require txn-related metadata (such as descriptor collections) to be passed
to the internal executor from the outer caller too. This commit is to add
a gate for this use case.

Release justification: bug fix
Release note: none
It was causing the lint in CI to fail.

Release note: None
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested review from a team as code owners September 20, 2022 19:59
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested a review from a team September 20, 2022 19:59
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested review from a team as code owners September 20, 2022 19:59
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested a review from a team September 20, 2022 19:59
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot force-pushed the blathers/backport-release-22.2-86334 branch from e61aa5c to fb3a0f9 Compare September 20, 2022 19:59
@blathers-crl
Copy link
Author

blathers-crl bot commented Sep 20, 2022

Thanks for opening a backport.

Please check the backport criteria before merging:

  • Patches should only be created for serious issues or test-only changes.
  • Patches should not break backwards-compatibility.
  • Patches should change as little code as possible.
  • Patches should not change on-disk formats or node communication protocols.
  • Patches should not add new functionality.
  • Patches must not add, edit, or otherwise modify cluster versions; or add version gates.
If some of the basic criteria cannot be satisfied, ensure that the exceptional criteria are satisfied within.
  • There is a high priority need for the functionality that cannot wait until the next release and is difficult to address in another way.
  • The new functionality is additive-only and only runs for clusters which have specifically “opted in” to it (e.g. by a cluster setting).
  • New code is protected by a conditional check that is trivial to verify and ensures that it only runs for opt-in clusters.
  • The PM and TL on the team that owns the changed code have signed off that the change obeys the above rules.

Add a brief release justification to the body of your PR to justify this backport.

Some other things to consider:

  • What did we do to ensure that a user that doesn’t know & care about this backport, has no idea that it happened?
  • Will this work in a cluster of mixed patch versions? Did we test that?
  • If a user upgrades a patch version, uses this feature, and then downgrades, what happens?

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested review from benbardin, stevendanna, ajwerner, dt, rafiss, ZhouXing19 and a team and removed request for a team September 20, 2022 19:59
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot added the blathers-backport This is a backport that Blathers created automatically. label Sep 20, 2022
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot added the O-robot Originated from a bot. label Sep 20, 2022
@cockroach-teamcity
Copy link
Member

This change is Reviewable

Copy link
Collaborator

@rafiss rafiss left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm! just needs a post on #release-backports cc @ZhouXing19

@rafiss rafiss merged commit 65d9bfe into release-22.2 Sep 20, 2022
@rafiss rafiss deleted the blathers/backport-release-22.2-86334 branch September 20, 2022 21:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
blathers-backport This is a backport that Blathers created automatically. O-robot Originated from a bot.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants