本节咱们来说讲并发中最多见的状况存在即更新,在并发中若未存在行记录则插入,此时未处理好极容易出现插入重复键状况,本文咱们来介绍对并发中存在就更新行记录的七种方案而且咱们来综合分析最合适的解决方案。html
首先咱们来建立测试表编程
IF OBJECT_ID('Test') IS NOT NULL DROP TABLE Test CREATE TABLE Test ( Id int, Name nchar(100), [Counter] int,primary key (Id), unique (Name) ); GO
咱们统一建立存储过程经过来SQLQueryStress来测试并发状况,咱们来看第一种状况。并发
IF OBJECT_ID('TestPro') IS NOT NULL DROP PROCEDURE TestPro; GO CREATE PROCEDURE TestPro ( @Id INT ) AS DECLARE @Name NCHAR(100) = CAST(@Id AS NCHAR(100)) BEGIN TRANSACTION IF EXISTS ( SELECT 1 FROM Test WHERE Id = @Id ) UPDATE Test SET [Counter] = [Counter] + 1 WHERE Id = @Id; ELSE INSERT Test ( Id, Name, [Counter] ) VALUES ( @Id, @Name, 1 ); COMMIT GO
同时开启100个线程和200个线程出现插入重复键的概率比较少仍是存在。高并发
IF OBJECT_ID('TestPro') IS NOT NULL DROP PROCEDURE TestPro; GO CREATE PROCEDURE TestPro ( @Id INT ) AS DECLARE @Name NCHAR(100) = CAST(@Id AS NCHAR(100)) SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL READ UNCOMMITTED BEGIN TRANSACTION IF EXISTS ( SELECT 1 FROM Test WHERE Id = @Id ) UPDATE Test SET [Counter] = [Counter] + 1 WHERE Id = @Id; ELSE INSERT Test ( Id, Name, [Counter] ) VALUES ( @Id, @name, 1 ); COMMIT GO
此时问题依旧和解决方案一无异(若是下降级别为最低隔离级别,若是行记录为空,前一事务若是未进行提交,当前事务也能读取到该行记录为空,若是当前事务插入进去并进行提交,此时前一事务再进行提交此时就会出现插入重复键问题)学习
IF OBJECT_ID('TestPro') IS NOT NULL DROP PROCEDURE TestPro; GO CREATE PROCEDURE TestPro ( @Id INT ) AS DECLARE @Name NCHAR(100) = CAST(@Id AS NCHAR(100)) SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE BEGIN TRANSACTION IF EXISTS ( SELECT 1 FROM dbo.Test WHERE Id = @Id ) UPDATE dbo.Test SET [Counter] = [Counter] + 1 WHERE Id = @Id; ELSE INSERT dbo.Test ( Id, Name, [Counter] ) VALUES ( @Id, @Name, 1 ); COMMIT GO
在这种状况下更加糟糕,直接到会致使死锁 测试
此时将隔离级别提高为最高隔离级别会解决插入重复键问题,可是对于更新来获取排它锁而未提交,而此时另一个进程进行查询获取共享锁此时将形成进程间相互阻塞从而形成死锁,因此今后知最高隔离级别有时候可以解决并发问题可是也会带来死锁问题。spa
此时咱们再来在添加最高隔离级别的基础上增添更新锁,以下:线程
IF OBJECT_ID('TestPro') IS NOT NULL DROP PROCEDURE TestPro; GO CREATE PROCEDURE TestPro ( @Id INT ) AS DECLARE @Name NCHAR(100) = CAST(@Id AS NCHAR(100)) SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE BEGIN TRANSACTION IF EXISTS ( SELECT 1 FROM dbo.Test WITH(UPDLOCK) WHERE Id = @Id ) UPDATE dbo.Test SET [Counter] = [Counter] + 1 WHERE Id = @Id; ELSE INSERT dbo.Test ( Id, Name, [Counter] ) VALUES ( @Id, @Name, 1 ); COMMIT GO
运行屡次均未发现出现什么异常,经过查询数据时使用更新锁而非共享锁,这样的话一来能够读取数据但不阻塞其余事务,二来还确保自上次读取数据后数据未被更改,这样就解决了死锁问题。貌似这样的方案是可行得,若是是高并发不知是否可行。3d
ALTER DATABASE UpsertTestDatabase SET ALLOW_SNAPSHOT_ISOLATION ON ALTER DATABASE UpsertTestDatabase SET READ_COMMITTED_SNAPSHOT ON GO IF OBJECT_ID('TestPro') IS NOT NULL DROP PROCEDURE TestPro; GO CREATE PROCEDURE TestPro ( @Id INT ) AS DECLARE @Name NCHAR(100) = CAST(@Id AS NCHAR(100)) BEGIN TRANSACTION IF EXISTS ( SELECT 1 FROM dbo.Test WHERE Id = @Id ) UPDATE dbo.Test SET [Counter] = [Counter] + 1 WHERE Id = @Id; ELSE INSERT dbo.Test ( Id, Name, [Counter] ) VALUES ( @Id, @Name, 1 ); COMMIT GO
上述解决方案也会出现插入重复键问题不可取。版本控制
IF OBJECT_ID('TestPro') IS NOT NULL DROP PROCEDURE TestPro; GO CREATE PROCEDURE TestPro ( @Id INT ) AS DECLARE @Name NCHAR(100) = CAST(@Id AS NCHAR(100)) DECLARE @updated TABLE ( i INT ); SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE; BEGIN TRANSACTION UPDATE Test SET [Counter] = [Counter] + 1 OUTPUT DELETED.Id INTO @updated WHERE Id = @Id; IF NOT EXISTS ( SELECT i FROM @updated ) INSERT INTO Test ( Id, Name, counter ) VALUES ( @Id, @Name, 1 ); COMMIT GO
通过屡次认证也是零错误,貌似经过表变量形式实现可行。
经过Merge关键来实现存在即更新不然则插入,同时咱们应该注意设置隔离级别为 SERIALIZABLE 不然会出现插入重复键问题,代码以下:
IF OBJECT_ID('TestPro') IS NOT NULL DROP PROCEDURE TestPro; GO CREATE PROCEDURE TestPro ( @Id INT ) AS DECLARE @Name NCHAR(100) = CAST(@Id AS NCHAR(100)) SET TRAN ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE BEGIN TRANSACTION MERGE Test AS [target] USING ( SELECT @Id AS Id ) AS source ON source.Id = [target].Id WHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE SET [Counter] = [target].[Counter] + 1 WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN INSERT ( Id, Name, [Counter] ) VALUES ( @Id, @Name, 1 ); COMMIT GO
屡次认证不管是并发100个线程仍是并发200个线程依然没有异常信息。
本节咱们详细讨论了在并发中如何处理存在即更新,不然即插入问题的解决方案,目前来说以上三种方案可行。
IF OBJECT_ID('TestPro') IS NOT NULL DROP PROCEDURE TestPro; GO CREATE PROCEDURE TestPro ( @Id INT ) AS DECLARE @Name NCHAR(100) = CAST(@Id AS NCHAR(100)) BEGIN TRANSACTION; UPDATE dbo.Test WITH ( UPDLOCK, HOLDLOCK ) SET [Counter] = [Counter] + 1 WHERE Id = @Id; IF ( @@ROWCOUNT = 0 ) BEGIN INSERT dbo.Test ( Id, Name, [Counter] ) VALUES ( @Id, @Name, 1 ); END COMMIT GO
IF OBJECT_ID('TestPro') IS NOT NULL DROP PROCEDURE TestPro; GO CREATE PROCEDURE TestPro ( @Id INT ) AS DECLARE @Name NCHAR(100) = CAST(@Id AS NCHAR(100)) DECLARE @updated TABLE ( i INT ); SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE; BEGIN TRANSACTION UPDATE Test SET [Counter] = [Counter] + 1 OUTPUT DELETED.id INTO @updated WHERE id = @id; IF NOT EXISTS ( SELECT i FROM @updated ) INSERT INTO Test ( Id, Name, counter ) VALUES ( @Id, @Name, 1 ); COMMIT GO
IF OBJECT_ID('TestPro') IS NOT NULL DROP PROCEDURE TestPro; GO CREATE PROCEDURE TestPro ( @Id INT ) AS DECLARE @Name NCHAR(100) = CAST(@Id AS NCHAR(100)) SET TRAN ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE BEGIN TRANSACTION MERGE Test AS [target] USING ( SELECT @Id AS Id ) AS source ON source.Id = [target].Id WHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE SET [Counter] = [target].[Counter] + 1 WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN INSERT ( Id, Name, [Counter] ) VALUES ( @Id, @Name, 1 ); COMMIT GO
暂时只能想到这三种解决方案,我的比较推荐方案一和方案三, 请问您有何高见,请留下您的评论若可行,我将进行后续补充。
本博文的评论很是精彩,同时对于小菜的我又从新学习了下存在即更新反之则插入的解决方案。本文从新更新已通过了两天,期间我是一直在看这方面的东西更加深刻的理解有些基础方面的东西仍是说的太笼统而且是我自身不是很理解而致使,菜不可怕,可怕的是还不深刻学习自认为本身的是对的,你说呢。
首先咱们得理解UPDLOCK和HOLDLOCK锁的做用是什么,HOLDLOCK相似于SERIALIZABLE隔离级别,对于共享锁咱们是能够读,可是不能进行更新和删除和插入直到当前并发事务完成,而UPDLOCK园中博文的解释:是容许您读取数据(不阻塞其它事务)并在之后更新数据,同时确保自从上次读取数据后数据没有被更改。当咱们用它来读取记录时能够对取到的记录加上更新锁,从而加上锁的记录在其它的线程中是不能更改的只能等本线程的事务结束后才能更改。通俗易懂点说,它不会阻塞并发的查询和插入操做,可是会阻塞更新或者删除对于当前事务查询出的数据,当查询到该数据存在时则有更新锁切换到排它锁。因此对于上述结尾总结的三种解决方案,咱们再来阐述下。
IF OBJECT_ID('TestPro') IS NOT NULL DROP PROCEDURE TestPro; GO CREATE PROCEDURE TestPro ( @Id INT ) AS DECLARE @Name NCHAR(100) = CAST(@Id AS NCHAR(100)) BEGIN TRANSACTION; UPDATE dbo.Test WITH ( HOLDLOCK ) SET [Counter] = [Counter] + 1 WHERE Id = @Id; IF ( @@ROWCOUNT = 0 ) BEGIN INSERT dbo.Test ( Id, Name, [Counter] ) VALUES ( @Id, @Name, 1 ); END COMMIT GO
若是咱们未加上HOLDLOCK锁提示,虽然UPDATE会获取排它锁,可是排它锁不会持续到事务结束一直保持着因此会致使插入重复键的问题,当咱们加上HOLDLOCK锁提示上述也说到相似悲观并发中的最高隔离级别,该锁提示一直会持续到事务结束,当有并发请求过来时,若此时查询到数据存在则会进行更新操做可是事务还未进行提交,此时其余请求将会也查到该行记录存在,可是会被当前的事务更新操做锁阻塞,若此时查询到数据不存在时同理如此。
IF OBJECT_ID('TestPro') IS NOT NULL DROP PROCEDURE TestPro; GO CREATE PROCEDURE TestPro ( @Id INT ) AS DECLARE @Name NCHAR(100) = CAST(@Id AS NCHAR(100)) BEGIN TRANSACTION IF EXISTS ( SELECT 1 FROM dbo.Test WITH(UPDLOCK, HOLDLOCK) WHERE Id = @Id ) UPDATE dbo.Test SET [Counter] = [Counter] + 1 WHERE Id = @Id; ELSE INSERT dbo.Test ( Id, Name, [Counter] ) VALUES ( @Id, @Name, 1 ); COMMIT GO
对于上述查询对比第一种解决方案咱们加上了UPDLOCK更新锁代替SELECT的共享锁,目的是当所传递的变量Id所查询的行记录不存在时不会致使阻塞,让其进行插入,也就是说不阻塞其余事务的插入并确保自上次以来行记录未被修改过,对于HOLDLOCK为了确保一直到事务释放锁,从而达到咱们的指望。总结起来一句话,若是查询期间行记录存在则锁定的资源则查询存在的行记录上,若是查询期间行记录不存在,那么经过HOLDLOCK来获取主键上的范围锁来防止在释放锁以前插入重复键,因此UPDLOCK为了解决并发更新不阻塞其余事务查询,HOLDLOCK防止并发插入重复键。
IF OBJECT_ID('TestPro') IS NOT NULL DROP PROCEDURE TestPro; GO CREATE PROCEDURE TestPro ( @Id INT ) AS DECLARE @Name NCHAR(100) = CAST(@Id AS NCHAR(100)) BEGIN TRANSACTION MERGE Test WITH(SERIALIZABLE ) AS [target] USING ( SELECT @Id AS Id ) AS source ON source.Id = [target].Id WHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE SET [Counter] = [target].[Counter] + 1 WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN INSERT ( Id, Name, [Counter] ) VALUES ( @Id, @Name, 1 ); COMMIT GO
写这篇博客后看到的评论才明白过来对并发存在即更新不然插入是只知其一;不知其二,此前的我认为更新语句获取排它锁,可是HOLDLOCK等同于SERIALIZABLE获取共享锁,可是排它锁和共享锁是互斥的,怎么能够在更新语句中添加HOLDLOCK提示呢?纠结了好久,只能说HOLDLOCK锁提示的做用相似于SERIALIZABLE,一个属于锁,而SERIALIZABLE 属于隔离级别,基于这点两者是不同的,同时我一直认为在存储过程当中加上SERIALIZABLE隔离级别和语句中加上HOLDLOCK做用是同样的,其实否则,在存储过程当中加上隔离级别和语句中加上HOLDLOCK做用域不同,存储过程当中加上SERIALIZABLE隔离级别对整个会话都起做用,而在语句中使用锁提示只是对当前执行语句其做用,这里感谢园友【笑东风】的指教,同时也感谢园友【MSSQL123】让我明白了我混淆了锁和隔离级别。
其实对于上述三种最终解决方案而言对于少许并发而言没有什么问题,上述对于存在即更新不然插入的并发方案只是下降了并发可能发生重复键的可能性,就像园友【Jacklondon Chen】所说,同时如上述第二种解决方案而言,若是行记录不存在那么UPDLOCK就不起做用,对于高并发而言利用HOLDLOCK虽然会阻塞插入,可是理论上来讲估计依然会发生插入重复键的问题,此时推荐利用园友【Jacklondon Chen】的解决方案,园友专门写了一篇博客来说述本篇博文的讨论以做为参考:http://www.cnblogs.com/jacklondon/p/programming_experience_concurrent.html