CS511 Design of Database Management Systems

1
CS511Design of Database Management Systems

• Lecture 11
• Logging and Recovery
• Kevin C. Chang

2
Announcement

• Reschedule
• Next Wed class ? 3/3 Thursday 5pm 1320 DCL.
• Please attend if you can!

3
Recovery Atomicity and Durability

• Atomicity
• all actions in the xact happen, or none happen
• Consistency
• if each xact is consistent, and the DB starts
  consistent, it ends up consistent
• Isolation
• execution of one xact is isolated from that of
  other xacts
• Durability
• if a xact commits, its effects persist
• Recovery Manager atomicity durability

4
Motivation

• Atomicity
• transactions may abort (rollback).
• Durability
• what if DBMS stops running? (Causes?)

• Desired Behavior after system restarts
• T1, T2 T3 should be durable.
• T4 T5 should be aborted (effects not seen).

crash!
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5
5
Assumptions

• Concurrency control is in effect
• strict 2PL, in particular.
• request s/x locks before read/write
• all the locks held until EOT (strict locking)
• no cascading rollback, or recoverable
• Updates are happening in place
• i.e. data is overwritten on (or deleted from) the
  disk
• A simple scheme to guarantee atomicity
  durability?

6
Handling the Buffer Pool
No Steal
Steal

• Force write to disk at commit?
• poor response time
• but provides durability
• Steal buffer-pool frames from uncommited xacts?
• if not, poor throughput
• if so, how can we ensure atomicity?
• Recovery scheme vs. B.M.
• undo-only can steal? must force?
• redo-only no steal? no force?

Force
Trivial
Desired
No Force
7
Basic Idea Logging

• Record redo and undo information in log
• sequential writes to log (put it on a separate
  disk).
• minimal info (diff) written to log, so multiple
  updates fit in a single log page
• log ordered list of redo/undo actions
• log record contains
• 
  
• and additional control info (which well see soon)

8
Write-Ahead Logging (WAL)

• Write-Ahead Logging Protocol
• must force the log record for an update before
  the corresponding data page gets to disk.
• must force all log records for a xact before
  commit.
• 1 guarantees atomicity (undo)
• 2 guarantees durability (redo)
• Exactly how is logging (and recovery!) done?
• well study the ARIES algorithms

9
ARIES Main Principles

• WAL
• Repeating history during REDO
• Logging changes during UNDO
• Enables
• simplicity and flexibility
• finer granularity locking (than a page)
• updates to (different parts of) same page are
  streamed in redo/undo
• redoing and undoing not necessarily exact
  physical inverse
• by repeating entire history in order and undo in
  order
• e.g., insert and delete on B-trees
• may not on same page rely on the context being
  reconstructed

10
WAL the Log

• Each log record has unique Log Sequence Number
• LSNs always increasing
• Each data page contains a pageLSN
• LSN of the most recent log record of latest
  update
• System keeps track of flushedLSN
• the max LSN flushed so far
• WAL before writing a page,
• pageLSN flushedLSN
• pageLSN in flushed already

Log records flushed to disk
Log tail in RAM
11
Log Records

• Possible log record types
• Update
• Commit
• Abort
• End
• end of commit or abort
• Compensation Log Records (CLRs)
• for UNDO actions

LogRecord fields
update records only
12
Other Log-Related State

• Transaction table
• one entry per active Xact
• contains XID, status (running/committed/aborted),
  and lastLSN
• Dirty page table
• one entry per dirty page in buffer pool
• contains recLSN -- the LSN of the log record
  which first caused the page to be dirty

13
Normal Execution of an Xact

• Series of reads writes, followed by commit or
  abort
• Strict 2PL
• STEAL, NO-FORCE buffer management, with
  write-ahead logging

14
Checkpointing

• Periodical checkpoint
• minimize the (analysis) time to recover from
  system crash
• Write to log
• begin_checkpoint record indicates when chkpt
  began
• end_checkpoint record contains current xact
  table and dirty page table. Fuzzy checkpoint
• other xacts continue to run these tables
  accurate only as of the time of the
  begin_checkpoint record
• no attempt to force dirty pages to disk
• effectiveness limited by earliest recLSN in dirty
  page table
• oldest unwritten change to a dirty page
• so a good idea to periodically flush dirty pages
  to disk!
• Store LSN of chkpt record in master record

15
Big Picture Whats Stored Where
LOG
RAM
DB
LogRecords
Xact Table lastLSN (last log) status Dirty
Page Table recLSN (first log) flushedLSN
Data pages each with a pageLSN
master record
16
Simple Transaction Abort

• For now, consider an explicit abort of a xact
• e.g., validation error, deadlock no crash
  involved
• Play back the log in reverse order,
• UNDOing updates
• get lastLSN of xact from xact table
• can follow chain of log records backward via the
  prevLSN field
• can we do so in crash-recovery undoing?
• before starting undo, write an abort log record.
• for recovering from crash during undo

17
Abort, cont.

• To perform UNDO, must have a lock on data
• no problem (strict locking)
• Before restoring old value of a page, write a
  CLR
• you continue logging while you undo
• CLR has one extra field undoNextLSN
• points to the next LSN to undo (i.e. the prevLSN
  of the record were currently undoing)
• CLRs never undone (but might be redone when
  repeating history after another crash)
• At end of UNDO, write an End log record.

• 120 CLR
• undo 101
• undonextLSN98
• (T1 lastLSN120)

T1 abort T1 lastLSN101
101
98
18
Transaction Commit

• Write commit record to log
• All log records up to xacts lastLSN are flushed.
• guarantees that flushedLSN ³ lastLSN
• Commit() returns (after synchronous IO)
• Write End record to log

19
Crash Recovery Big Picture
Oldest log rec. of Xact active at crash

• Start from a checkpoint (found via master record)
• Three phases. Need to
• figure out which xacts committed since
  checkpoint, which failed (Analysis).
• REDO all actions.
• repeat history
• UNDO effects of failed xacts.

Smallest recLSN in dirty page table after Analysis
Last chkpt
CRASH
A
R
U
20
Crash Recovery vs. Transaction Abort?

• What are the differences?

21
Crash Recovery vs. Transaction Abort?

• Abort
• (state in memory, then) uedo one xact
• Recovery
• reconstruct state, then uedo all uncommitted xact
• reconstruction analysis redo
• undo must consider global ordering of undos

22
Recovery Analysis Phase

• Goal reconstruct two state tables
• xact-table what xacts to abort (undo)?
• dirty-page table where to start redo?
• (init) Restore state at checkpoint
• via end_checkpoint record
• (delta after ckpt) Scan log forward from ckpt
• End record remove xact from xact table
• Other records
• add Xact to Xact table, set lastLSNLSN
• change xact status if commit seen
• Update record only If P not in Dirty Page Table,
• add P to DPT, set its recLSNLSN

23
Recovery REDO Phase

• Repeat History to reconstruct state at crash
• reapply all updates (even of aborted xacts!) and
  redo CLRs
• (CLRs are now simply dirty-data before last
  crash)
• Scan forward from earliest recLSN in DPT
• Redo each CLR or update log rec LSN, unless
• affected page is not in the Dirty Page Table, or
• affected page is in DPT, but has recLSN LSN
• why can this happen? page out and in after this
  LSN
• pageLSN (in DB) ³ LSN
• why this is done last? (in fact, this also checks
  the above two)
• To REDO an action
• reapply logged action (not only work for
  image-based!)
• set pageLSN to LSN. No additional logging!

24
Recovery UNDO Phase
T1
T3
T2

• ToUndo lastLSN of all loser xacts
• Repeat
• choose largest LSN among ToUndo
• if this LSN is a CLR and undoNextLSNNULL
• write an End record for this xact
• If this LSN is a CLR, and undoNextLSN ! NULL
• add undoNextLSN to ToUndo
• (what happens to other CLRs of this xact?)
• only last CLR seen on this chain others not on
  chain
• Else this LSN is an update. Undo the update,
  write a CLR, add prevLSN to ToUndo.
• Until ToUndo is empty

1
2
3
4
5
25
Example of Recovery
LSN LOG
begin_checkpoint end_checkpoint update T1
writes P5 update T2 writes P3 T1 abort CLR Undo
T1 LSN 10 T1 End update T3 writes P1 update T2
writes P5 CRASH, RESTART
00 05 10 20 30 40
45 50 60
prevLSNs
Xact Table lastLSN status DPT recLSN flushedL
SN
ToUndo
26
Example Crash During Restart!
LSN LOG
begin_checkpoint, end_checkpoint update T1
writes P5 update T2 writes P3 T1 abort CLR Undo
T1 LSN 10, T1 End update T3 writes P1 update T2
writes P5 CRASH, RESTART CLR Undo T2 LSN 60 CLR
Undo T3 LSN 50, T3 end CRASH, RESTART CLR Undo
T2 LSN 20, T2 end
00,05 10 20 30 40,45 50
60 70 80,85 90
undoNextLSN
Xact Table lastLSN status DPT recLSN flushedL
SN
ToUndo
27
Additional Crash Issues

• What happens if system crashes during Analysis?
  During REDO?
• How do you limit work in REDO?
• flush asynchronously in the background.
• How do you limit work in UNDO?
• avoid long-running Xacts.

28
Summary of Logging/Recovery

• Recovery Manager guarantees atomicity
  durability.
• Use WAL to allow STEAL/NO-FORCE w/o sacrificing
  correctness.
• LSNs identify log records linked into backwards
  chains per transaction (via prevLSN).
• pageLSN allows comparison of data page and log
  records (so redo becomes simple)

29
Summary, Cont.

• Checkpointing A quick way to limit the amount
  of log to scan on recovery
• Recovery works in 3 phases
• Analysis Forward from checkpoint.
• Redo Forward from oldest recLSN.
• Undo Backward from end to first LSN of oldest
  Xact alive at crash.
• Upon Undo, write CLRs.
• Redo repeats history simplifies the logic!

30
Whats Next?

• Benchmark!

31
More on Steal and Force

• STEAL (why enforcing atomicity is hard)
• to steal frame F current page in F (say P) is
  written to disk some uncommitted xact holds lock
  on P
• what if the xact with the lock on P aborts?
• to support undoing
• must remember the old value of P at steal time
• NO FORCE (why enforcing durability is hard)
• what if system crashes before a modified page is
  written to disk?
• to support redoing
• write as little as possible, in a convenient
  place, at commit time