Allow a no-wait lock acquisition to succeed in more cases.

We don't determine the position at which a process waiting for a lock
should insert itself into the wait queue until we reach ProcSleep(),
and we may at that point discover that we must insert ourselves ahead
of everyone who wants a conflicting lock, in which case we obtain the
lock immediately. Up until now, a no-wait lock acquisition would fail
in such cases, erroneously claiming that the lock couldn't be obtained
immediately.  Fix that by trying ProcSleep even in the no-wait case.

No back-patch for now, because I'm treating this as an improvement to
the existing no-wait feature. It could instead be argued that it's a
bug fix, on the theory that there should never be any case whatsoever
where no-wait fails to obtain a lock that would have been obtained
immediately without no-wait, but I'm reluctant to interpret the
semantics of no-wait that strictly.

Robert Haas and Jingxian Li

Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmobCH-kMXGVpb0BB-iNMdtcNkTvcZ4JBxDJows3kYM+GDg@mail.gmail.com

Author: robertmhaas

src/backend/storage/lmgr/lock.c

@@ -360,7 +360,8 @@ static PROCLOCK *SetupLockInTable(LockMethod lockMethodTable, PGPROC *proc,
 static void GrantLockLocal(LOCALLOCK *locallock, ResourceOwner owner);
 static void BeginStrongLockAcquire(LOCALLOCK *locallock, uint32 fasthashcode);
 static void FinishStrongLockAcquire(void);
-static void WaitOnLock(LOCALLOCK *locallock, ResourceOwner owner);
+static void WaitOnLock(LOCALLOCK *locallock, ResourceOwner owner,
+					   bool dontWait);
 static void ReleaseLockIfHeld(LOCALLOCK *locallock, bool sessionLock);
 static void LockReassignOwner(LOCALLOCK *locallock, ResourceOwner parent);
 static bool UnGrantLock(LOCK *lock, LOCKMODE lockmode,
@@ -1024,50 +1025,15 @@ LockAcquireExtended(const LOCKTAG *locktag,
 	}
 	else
 	{
-		/*
-		 * We can't acquire the lock immediately.  If caller specified no
-		 * blocking, remove useless table entries and return
-		 * LOCKACQUIRE_NOT_AVAIL without waiting.
-		 */
-		if (dontWait)
-		{
-			AbortStrongLockAcquire();
-			if (proclock->holdMask == 0)
-			{
-				uint32		proclock_hashcode;
-
-				proclock_hashcode = ProcLockHashCode(&proclock->tag, hashcode);
-				dlist_delete(&proclock->lockLink);
-				dlist_delete(&proclock->procLink);
-				if (!hash_search_with_hash_value(LockMethodProcLockHash,
-												 &(proclock->tag),
-												 proclock_hashcode,
-												 HASH_REMOVE,
-												 NULL))
-					elog(PANIC, "proclock table corrupted");
-			}
-			else
-				PROCLOCK_PRINT("LockAcquire: NOWAIT", proclock);
-			lock->nRequested--;
-			lock->requested[lockmode]--;
-			LOCK_PRINT("LockAcquire: conditional lock failed", lock, lockmode);
-			Assert((lock->nRequested > 0) && (lock->requested[lockmode] >= 0));
-			Assert(lock->nGranted <= lock->nRequested);
-			LWLockRelease(partitionLock);
-			if (locallock->nLocks == 0)
-				RemoveLocalLock(locallock);
-			if (locallockp)
-				*locallockp = NULL;
-			return LOCKACQUIRE_NOT_AVAIL;
-		}
-
 		/*
 		 * Set bitmask of locks this process already holds on this object.
 		 */
 		MyProc->heldLocks = proclock->holdMask;
 
 		/*
-		 * Sleep till someone wakes me up.
+		 * Sleep till someone wakes me up. We do this even in the dontWait
+		 * case, beause while trying to go to sleep, we may discover that we
+		 * can acquire the lock immediately after all.
 		 */
 
 		TRACE_POSTGRESQL_LOCK_WAIT_START(locktag->locktag_field1,
@@ -1077,7 +1043,7 @@ LockAcquireExtended(const LOCKTAG *locktag,
 										 locktag->locktag_type,
 										 lockmode);
 
-		WaitOnLock(locallock, owner);
+		WaitOnLock(locallock, owner, dontWait);
 
 		TRACE_POSTGRESQL_LOCK_WAIT_DONE(locktag->locktag_field1,
 										locktag->locktag_field2,
@@ -1093,17 +1059,63 @@ LockAcquireExtended(const LOCKTAG *locktag,
 		 */
 
 		/*
-		 * Check the proclock entry status, in case something in the ipc
-		 * communication doesn't work correctly.
+		 * Check the proclock entry status. If dontWait = true, this is an
+		 * expected case; otherwise, it will open happen if something in the
+		 * ipc communication doesn't work correctly.
 		 */
 		if (!(proclock->holdMask & LOCKBIT_ON(lockmode)))
 		{
 			AbortStrongLockAcquire();
-			PROCLOCK_PRINT("LockAcquire: INCONSISTENT", proclock);
-			LOCK_PRINT("LockAcquire: INCONSISTENT", lock, lockmode);
-			/* Should we retry ? */
-			LWLockRelease(partitionLock);
-			elog(ERROR, "LockAcquire failed");
+
+			if (dontWait)
+			{
+				/*
+				 * We can't acquire the lock immediately.  If caller specified
+				 * no blocking, remove useless table entries and return
+				 * LOCKACQUIRE_NOT_AVAIL without waiting.
+				 */
+				if (proclock->holdMask == 0)
+				{
+					uint32		proclock_hashcode;
+
+					proclock_hashcode = ProcLockHashCode(&proclock->tag,
+														 hashcode);
+					dlist_delete(&proclock->lockLink);
+					dlist_delete(&proclock->procLink);
+					if (!hash_search_with_hash_value(LockMethodProcLockHash,
+													 &(proclock->tag),
+													 proclock_hashcode,
+													 HASH_REMOVE,
+													 NULL))
+						elog(PANIC, "proclock table corrupted");
+				}
+				else
+					PROCLOCK_PRINT("LockAcquire: NOWAIT", proclock);
+				lock->nRequested--;
+				lock->requested[lockmode]--;
+				LOCK_PRINT("LockAcquire: conditional lock failed",
+						   lock, lockmode);
+				Assert((lock->nRequested > 0) &&
+					   (lock->requested[lockmode] >= 0));
+				Assert(lock->nGranted <= lock->nRequested);
+				LWLockRelease(partitionLock);
+				if (locallock->nLocks == 0)
+					RemoveLocalLock(locallock);
+				if (locallockp)
+					*locallockp = NULL;
+				return LOCKACQUIRE_NOT_AVAIL;
+			}
+			else
+			{
+				/*
+				 * We should have gotten the lock, but somehow that didn't
+				 * happen. If we get here, it's a bug.
+				 */
+				PROCLOCK_PRINT("LockAcquire: INCONSISTENT", proclock);
+				LOCK_PRINT("LockAcquire: INCONSISTENT", lock, lockmode);
+				LWLockRelease(partitionLock);
+				elog(ERROR, "LockAcquire failed");
+			}
 		}
 		PROCLOCK_PRINT("LockAcquire: granted", proclock);
 		LOCK_PRINT("LockAcquire: granted", lock, lockmode);
@@ -1777,10 +1789,11 @@ MarkLockClear(LOCALLOCK *locallock)
  * Caller must have set MyProc->heldLocks to reflect locks already held
  * on the lockable object by this process.
  *
- * The appropriate partition lock must be held at entry.
+ * The appropriate partition lock must be held at entry, and will still be
+ * held at exit.
  */
 static void
-WaitOnLock(LOCALLOCK *locallock, ResourceOwner owner)
+WaitOnLock(LOCALLOCK *locallock, ResourceOwner owner, bool dontWait)
 {
 	LOCKMETHODID lockmethodid = LOCALLOCK_LOCKMETHOD(*locallock);
 	LockMethod	lockMethodTable = LockMethods[lockmethodid];
@@ -1813,8 +1826,14 @@ WaitOnLock(LOCALLOCK *locallock, ResourceOwner owner)
 	 */
 	PG_TRY();
 	{
-		if (ProcSleep(locallock, lockMethodTable) != PROC_WAIT_STATUS_OK)
+		/*
+		 * If dontWait = true, we handle success and failure in the same way
+		 * here. The caller will be able to sort out what has happened.
+		 */
+		if (ProcSleep(locallock, lockMethodTable, dontWait) != PROC_WAIT_STATUS_OK
+			&& !dontWait)
 		{
+
 			/*
 			 * We failed as a result of a deadlock, see CheckDeadLock(). Quit
 			 * now.

src/backend/storage/lmgr/proc.c

@@ -1043,18 +1043,27 @@ AuxiliaryPidGetProc(int pid)
  * Caller must have set MyProc->heldLocks to reflect locks already held
  * on the lockable object by this process (under all XIDs).
  *
+ * It's not actually guaranteed that we need to wait when this function is
+ * called, because it could be that when we try to find a position at which
+ * to insert ourself into the wait queue, we discover that we must be inserted
+ * ahead of everyone who wants a lock that conflict with ours. In that case,
+ * we get the lock immediately. Beause of this, it's sensible for this function
+ * to have a dontWait argument, despite the name.
+ *
  * The lock table's partition lock must be held at entry, and will be held
  * at exit.
  *
- * Result: PROC_WAIT_STATUS_OK if we acquired the lock, PROC_WAIT_STATUS_ERROR if not (deadlock).
+ * Result: PROC_WAIT_STATUS_OK if we acquired the lock, PROC_WAIT_STATUS_ERROR
+ * if not (if dontWait = true, this is a deadlock; if dontWait = false, we
+ * would have had to wait).
  *
  * ASSUME: that no one will fiddle with the queue until after
  *		we release the partition lock.
  *
  * NOTES: The process queue is now a priority queue for locking.
  */
 ProcWaitStatus
-ProcSleep(LOCALLOCK *locallock, LockMethod lockMethodTable)
+ProcSleep(LOCALLOCK *locallock, LockMethod lockMethodTable, bool dontWait)
 {
 	LOCKMODE	lockmode = locallock->tag.mode;
 	LOCK	   *lock = locallock->lock;
@@ -1167,6 +1176,13 @@ ProcSleep(LOCALLOCK *locallock, LockMethod lockMethodTable)
 		}
 	}
 
+	/*
+	 * At this point we know that we'd really need to sleep. If we've been
+	 * commanded not to do that, bail out.
+	 */
+	if (dontWait)
+		return PROC_WAIT_STATUS_ERROR;
+
 	/*
 	 * Insert self into queue, at the position determined above.
 	 */

src/include/storage/proc.h

@@ -471,7 +471,9 @@ extern int	GetStartupBufferPinWaitBufId(void);
 extern bool HaveNFreeProcs(int n, int *nfree);
 extern void ProcReleaseLocks(bool isCommit);
 
-extern ProcWaitStatus ProcSleep(LOCALLOCK *locallock, LockMethod lockMethodTable);
+extern ProcWaitStatus ProcSleep(LOCALLOCK *locallock,
+								LockMethod lockMethodTable,
+								bool dontWait);
 extern void ProcWakeup(PGPROC *proc, ProcWaitStatus waitStatus);
 extern void ProcLockWakeup(LockMethod lockMethodTable, LOCK *lock);
 extern void CheckDeadLockAlert(void);

src/test/isolation/expected/lock-nowait.out

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+Parsed test spec with 2 sessions
+
+starting permutation: s1a s2a s1b s1c s2c
+step s1a: LOCK TABLE a1 IN ACCESS EXCLUSIVE MODE;
+step s2a: LOCK TABLE a1 IN EXCLUSIVE MODE; <waiting ...>
+step s1b: LOCK TABLE a1 IN SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE MODE NOWAIT;
+step s1c: COMMIT;
+step s2a: <... completed>
+step s2c: COMMIT;

src/test/isolation/isolation_schedule

@@ -111,3 +111,4 @@ test: serializable-parallel
 test: serializable-parallel-2
 test: serializable-parallel-3
 test: matview-write-skew
+test: lock-nowait

src/test/isolation/specs/lock-nowait.spec

@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+# While requesting nowait lock, if the lock requested should
+# be inserted in front of some waiter, check to see if the lock
+# conflicts with already-held locks or the requests before
+# the waiter. If not, then just grant myself the requested
+# lock immediately.  Test this scenario.
+
+setup
+{
+  CREATE TABLE a1 ();
+}
+
+teardown
+{
+  DROP TABLE a1;
+}
+
+session s1
+setup		{ BEGIN; }
+step s1a	{ LOCK TABLE a1 IN ACCESS EXCLUSIVE MODE; }
+step s1b	{ LOCK TABLE a1 IN SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE MODE NOWAIT; }
+step s1c	{ COMMIT; }
+
+session s2
+setup		{ BEGIN; }
+step s2a	{ LOCK TABLE a1 IN EXCLUSIVE MODE; }
+step s2c	{ COMMIT; }
+
+permutation s1a s2a s1b s1c s2c