96ece11cdd
Summary:
This change introduces a pure virtual initial implementation of the transaction
engine which is then implemented in two versions: single node and distributed.
The interface classes now have the following hierarchy:
```
Engine (pure interface)
|
+----+---------- EngineDistributed (common logic)
| |
EngineSingleNode +-------+--------+
| |
EngineMaster EngineWorker
```
In addition to this layout the `EngineMaster` uses `EngineSingleNode` as its
underlying storage engine and only changes the necessary functions to make
them work with the `EngineWorker`.
After this change I recommend that you delete the following leftover files:
```
rm src/distributed/transactional_cache_cleaner_rpc_messages.*
rm src/transactions/common.*
rm src/transactions/engine_rpc_messages.*
```
Reviewers: teon.banek, msantl, buda
Reviewed By: teon.banek
Subscribers: pullbot
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.memgraph.io/D1589
75 lines
2.0 KiB
C++
75 lines
2.0 KiB
C++
#include <vector>
|
|
#include "gtest/gtest.h"
|
|
|
|
#include "mvcc/record.hpp"
|
|
#include "mvcc/version.hpp"
|
|
#include "mvcc/version_list.hpp"
|
|
#include "transactions/single_node/engine_single_node.hpp"
|
|
#include "transactions/transaction.hpp"
|
|
#include "utils/thread/sync.hpp"
|
|
|
|
#include "mvcc_gc_common.hpp"
|
|
|
|
TEST(MVCC, Deadlock) {
|
|
tx::EngineSingleNode engine;
|
|
|
|
auto t0 = engine.Begin();
|
|
mvcc::VersionList<Prop> version_list1(*t0, 0, 0);
|
|
mvcc::VersionList<Prop> version_list2(*t0, 1, 1);
|
|
engine.Commit(*t0);
|
|
|
|
auto t1 = engine.Begin();
|
|
auto t2 = engine.Begin();
|
|
|
|
version_list1.update(*t1);
|
|
version_list2.update(*t2);
|
|
EXPECT_THROW(version_list1.update(*t2), utils::LockTimeoutException);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// TODO Gleich: move this test to mvcc_gc???
|
|
// check that we don't delete records when we re-link
|
|
TEST(MVCC, UpdateDontDelete) {
|
|
std::atomic<int> count{0};
|
|
{
|
|
tx::EngineSingleNode engine;
|
|
auto t1 = engine.Begin();
|
|
mvcc::VersionList<DestrCountRec> version_list(*t1, 0, 0, count);
|
|
engine.Commit(*t1);
|
|
|
|
auto t2 = engine.Begin();
|
|
version_list.update(*t2);
|
|
engine.Abort(*t2);
|
|
EXPECT_EQ(count, 0);
|
|
|
|
auto t3 = engine.Begin();
|
|
|
|
// Update re-links the node and shouldn't clear it yet.
|
|
version_list.update(*t3);
|
|
EXPECT_EQ(count, 0);
|
|
|
|
// TODO Gleich: why don't we also test that remove doesn't delete?
|
|
engine.Commit(*t3);
|
|
}
|
|
EXPECT_EQ(count, 3);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// Check that we get the oldest record.
|
|
TEST(MVCC, Oldest) {
|
|
tx::EngineSingleNode engine;
|
|
auto t1 = engine.Begin();
|
|
mvcc::VersionList<Prop> version_list(*t1, 0, 0);
|
|
auto first = version_list.Oldest();
|
|
EXPECT_NE(first, nullptr);
|
|
// TODO Gleich: no need to do 10 checks of the same thing
|
|
for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i) {
|
|
engine.Advance(t1->id_);
|
|
version_list.update(*t1);
|
|
EXPECT_EQ(version_list.Oldest(), first);
|
|
}
|
|
// TODO Gleich: what about remove?
|
|
// TODO Gleich: here it might make sense to write a concurrent test
|
|
// since these ops rely heavily on linkage atomicity?
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// TODO Gleich: perhaps some concurrent VersionList::find tests?
|