diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/vfs-shm.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | doc/vfs-shm.txt | 130 |
1 files changed, 130 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/vfs-shm.txt b/doc/vfs-shm.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c1f125a --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/vfs-shm.txt @@ -0,0 +1,130 @@ +The 5 states of an historical rollback lock as implemented by the +xLock, xUnlock, and xCheckReservedLock methods of the sqlite3_io_methods +objec are: + + UNLOCKED + SHARED + RESERVED + PENDING + EXCLUSIVE + +The wal-index file has a similar locking hierarchy implemented using +the xShmLock method of the sqlite3_vfs object, but with 7 +states. Each connection to a wal-index file must be in one of +the following 7 states: + + UNLOCKED + READ + READ_FULL + WRITE + PENDING + CHECKPOINT + RECOVER + +These roughly correspond to the 5 states of a rollback lock except +that SHARED is split out into 2 states: READ and READ_FULL and +there is an extra RECOVER state used for wal-index reconstruction. + +The meanings of the various wal-index locking states is as follows: + + UNLOCKED - The wal-index is not in use. + + READ - Some prefix of the wal-index is being read. Additional + wal-index information can be appended at any time. The + newly appended content will be ignored by the holder of + the READ lock. + + READ_FULL - The entire wal-index is being read. No new information + can be added to the wal-index. The holder of a READ_FULL + lock promises never to read pages from the database file + that are available anywhere in the wal-index. + + WRITE - It is OK to append to the wal-index file and to adjust + the header to indicate the new "last valid frame". + + PENDING - Waiting on all READ locks to clear so that a + CHECKPOINT lock can be acquired. + + CHECKPOINT - It is OK to write any WAL data into the database file + and zero the last valid frame field of the wal-index + header. The wal-index file itself may not be changed + other than to zero the last valid frame field in the + header. + + RECOVER - Held during wal-index recovery. Used to prevent a + race if multiple clients try to recover a wal-index at + the same time. + + +A particular lock manager implementation may coalesce one or more of +the wal-index locking states, though with a reduction in concurrency. +For example, an implemention might implement only exclusive locking, +in which case all states would be equivalent to CHECKPOINT, meaning that +only one reader or one writer or one checkpointer could be active at a +time. Or, an implementation might combine READ and READ_FULL into +a single state equivalent to READ, meaning that a writer could +coexist with a reader, but no reader or writers could coexist with a +checkpointer. + +The lock manager must obey the following rules: + +(1) A READ cannot coexist with CHECKPOINT. +(2) A READ_FULL cannot coexist with WRITE. +(3) None of WRITE, PENDING, CHECKPOINT, or RECOVER can coexist. + +The SQLite core will obey the next set of rules. These rules are +assertions on the behavior of the SQLite core which might be verified +during testing using an instrumented lock manager. + +(5) No part of the wal-index will be read without holding either some + kind of SHM lock or an EXCLUSIVE lock on the original database. + The original database is the file named in the 2nd parameter to + the xShmOpen method. + +(6) A holder of a READ_FULL will never read any page of the database + file that is contained anywhere in the wal-index. + +(7) No part of the wal-index other than the header will be written nor + will the size of the wal-index grow without holding a WRITE or + an EXCLUSIVE on the original database file. + +(8) The wal-index header will not be written without holding one of + WRITE, CHECKPOINT, or RECOVER on the wal-index or an EXCLUSIVE on + the original database files. + +(9) A CHECKPOINT or RECOVER must be held on the wal-index, or an + EXCLUSIVE on the original database file, in order to reset the + last valid frame counter in the header of the wal-index back to zero. + +(10) A WRITE can only increase the last valid frame pointer in the header. + +The SQLite core will only ever send requests for UNLOCK, READ, WRITE, +CHECKPOINT, or RECOVER to the lock manager. The SQLite core will never +request a READ_FULL or PENDING lock though the lock manager may deliver +those locking states in response to READ and CHECKPOINT requests, +respectively, if and only if the requested READ or CHECKPOINT cannot +be delivered. + +The following are the allowed lock transitions: + + Original-State Request New-State + -------------- ---------- ---------- +(11a) UNLOCK READ READ +(11b) UNLOCK READ READ_FULL +(11c) UNLOCK CHECKPOINT PENDING +(11d) UNLOCK CHECKPOINT CHECKPOINT +(11e) READ UNLOCK UNLOCK +(11f) READ WRITE WRITE +(11g) READ RECOVER RECOVER +(11h) READ_FULL UNLOCK UNLOCK +(11i) READ_FULL WRITE WRITE +(11j) READ_FULL RECOVER RECOVER +(11k) WRITE READ READ +(11l) PENDING UNLOCK UNLOCK +(11m) PENDING CHECKPOINT CHECKPOINT +(11n) CHECKPOINT UNLOCK UNLOCK +(11o) RECOVER READ READ + +These 15 transitions are all that needs to be supported. The lock +manager implementation can assert that fact. The other 27 possible +transitions among the 7 locking states will never occur. |