这次,我们分析一下,为什么会死锁呢?再回顾一下两个sp的写法:
CREATE PROC p1 @p1 int AS
SELECT c2, c3 FROM t1 WHERE c2 BETWEEN @p1 AND @p1 1
GO
CREATE PROC p2 @p1 int AS
UPDATE t1 SET c2 = c2 1 WHERE c1 = @p1
UPDATE t1 SET c2 = c2-1 WHERE c1 = @p1
GO
很希奇吧!p1没有insert,没有delete,没有update,只是一个select,p2才是update。这个和我们前面说过的,trans1里面updata A,update B;trans2里面upate B,update A,根本不贴边啊!
那么,什么导致了死锁?
需要从事件日志中,看sql的死锁信息:
Spid X is running this query (line 2 of proc [p1], inputbuffer “… EXEC p1 4 …”):
SELECT c2, c3 FROM t1 WHERE c2 BETWEEN @p1 AND @p1 1
Spid Y is running this query (line 2 of proc [p2], inputbuffer “EXEC p2 4”):
UPDATE t1 SET c2 = c2 1 WHERE c1 = @p1
The SELECT is waiting for a Shared KEY lock on index t1.cidx. The UPDATE holds a conflicting X lock.
The UPDATE is waiting for an eXclusive KEY lock on index t1.idx1. The SELECT holds a conflicting S lock.
首先,我们看看p1的执行计划。怎么看呢?可以执行set statistics profile on,这句就可以了。下面是p1的执行计划
SELECT c2, c3 FROM t1 WHERE c2 BETWEEN @p1 AND @p1 1
|--Nested Loops(Inner Join, OUTER REFERENCES:([Uniq1002], [t1].[c1]))
|--Index Seek(OBJECT:([t1].[idx1]), SEEK:([t1].[c2] >= [@p1] AND [t1].[c2] <= [@p1] (1)) ORDERED FORWARD)
|--Clustered Index Seek(OBJECT:([t1].[cidx]), SEEK:([t1].[c1]=[t1].[c1] AND [Uniq1002]=[Uniq1002]) LOOKUP ORDERED FORWARD)
我们看到了一个nested loops,第一行,利用索引t1.c2来进行seek,seek出来的那个rowid,在第二行中,用来通过聚集索引来查找整行的数据。这是什么?就是bookmark lookup啊!为什么?因为我们需要的c2、c3不能完全的被索引t1.c1带出来,所以需要书签查找。
好,我们接着看p2的执行计划。
UPDATE t1 SET c2 = c2 1 WHERE c1 = @p1
|--Clustered Index Update(OBJECT:([t1].[cidx]), OBJECT:([t1].[idx1]), SET:([t1].[c2] = [Expr1004]))
|--Compute Scalar(DEFINE:([Expr1013]=[Expr1013]))
|--Compute Scalar(DEFINE:([Expr1004]=[t1].[c2] (1), [Expr1013]=CASE WHEN CASE WHEN ...
|--Top(ROWCOUNT est 0)
|--Clustered Index Seek(OBJECT:([t1].[cidx]), SEEK:([t1].[c1]=[@p1]) ORDERED FORWARD)
评论加载中…
![]() |