Add basic read/write lock

synapse/storage/databases/main/lock.py

@@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
     LoggingDatabaseConnection,
     LoggingTransaction,
 )
+from synapse.storage.engines import PostgresEngine
 from synapse.util import Clock
 from synapse.util.stringutils import random_string
 
@@ -68,12 +69,18 @@ def __init__(
         self._reactor = hs.get_reactor()
         self._instance_name = hs.get_instance_id()
 
-        # A map from `(lock_name, lock_key)` to the token of any locks that we
-        # think we currently hold.
-        self._live_tokens: WeakValueDictionary[
+        # A map from `(lock_name, lock_key)` to lock that we think we
+        # currently hold.
+        self._live_lock_tokens: WeakValueDictionary[
             Tuple[str, str], Lock
         ] = WeakValueDictionary()
 
+        # A map from `(lock_name, lock_key, token)` to read/write lock that we
+        # think we currently hold.
+        self._live_read_write_lock_tokens: WeakValueDictionary[
+            Tuple[str, str, str], Lock
+        ] = WeakValueDictionary()
+
         # When we shut down we want to remove the locks. Technically this can
         # lead to a race, as we may drop the lock while we are still processing.
         # However, a) it should be a small window, b) the lock is best effort
@@ -91,11 +98,13 @@ async def _on_shutdown(self) -> None:
         """Called when the server is shutting down"""
         logger.info("Dropping held locks due to shutdown")
 
-        # We need to take a copy of the tokens dict as dropping the locks will
-        # cause the dictionary to change.
-        locks = dict(self._live_tokens)
+        # We need to take a copy of the locks as dropping the locks will cause
+        # the dictionary to change.
+        locks = list(self._live_lock_tokens.values()) + list(
+            self._live_read_write_lock_tokens.values()
+        )
 
-        for lock in locks.values():
+        for lock in locks:
             await lock.release()
 
         logger.info("Dropped locks due to shutdown")
@@ -122,7 +131,7 @@ async def _try_acquire_lock(
         """
 
         # Check if this process has taken out a lock and if it's still valid.
-        lock = self._live_tokens.get((lock_name, lock_key))
+        lock = self._live_lock_tokens.get((lock_name, lock_key))
         if lock and await lock.is_still_valid():
             return None
 
@@ -176,12 +185,113 @@ def _try_acquire_lock_txn(txn: LoggingTransaction) -> bool:
             self._reactor,
             self._clock,
             self,
+            read_write=False,
             lock_name=lock_name,
             lock_key=lock_key,
             token=token,
         )
 
-        self._live_tokens[(lock_name, lock_key)] = lock
+        self._live_lock_tokens[(lock_name, lock_key)] = lock
+
+        return lock
+
+    async def try_acquire_read_write_lock(
+        self,
+        lock_name: str,
+        lock_key: str,
+        write: bool,
+    ) -> Optional["Lock"]:
+        """Try to acquire a lock for the given name/key. Will return an async
+        context manager if the lock is successfully acquired, which *must* be
+        used (otherwise the lock will leak).
+        """
+
+        now = self._clock.time_msec()
+        token = random_string(6)
+
+        def _try_acquire_read_write_lock_txn(txn: LoggingTransaction) -> None:
+            # We attempt to acquire the lock by inserting into
+            # `worker_read_write_locks` and seeing if that fails any
+            # constraints. If it doesn't then we have acquired the lock,
+            # otherwise we haven't.
+            #
+            # Before that though we clear the table of any stale locks.
+
+            delete_sql = """
+                DELETE FROM worker_read_write_locks
+                    WHERE last_renewed_ts < ? AND lock_name = ? AND lock_key = ?;
+            """
+
+            insert_sql = """
+                INSERT INTO worker_read_write_locks (lock_name, lock_key, write_lock, instance_name, token, last_renewed_ts)
+                VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?)
+                ON CONFLICT (lock_name, lock_key, token)
+                DO UPDATE
+                    SET
+                        last_renewed_ts = EXCLUDED.last_renewed_ts
+            """
+
+            if isinstance(self.database_engine, PostgresEngine):
+                # For Postgres we can send these queries at the same time.
+                txn.execute(
+                    delete_sql + ";" + insert_sql,
+                    (
+                        # DELETE args
+                        now - _LOCK_TIMEOUT_MS,
+                        lock_name,
+                        lock_key,
+                        # UPSERT args
+                        lock_name,
+                        lock_key,
+                        write,
+                        self._instance_name,
+                        token,
+                        now,
+                    ),
+                )
+            else:
+                # For SQLite these need to be two queries.
+                txn.execute(
+                    delete_sql,
+                    (
+                        now - _LOCK_TIMEOUT_MS,
+                        lock_name,
+                        lock_key,
+                    ),
+                )
+                txn.execute(
+                    insert_sql,
+                    (
+                        lock_name,
+                        lock_key,
+                        write,
+                        self._instance_name,
+                        token,
+                        now,
+                    ),
+                )
+
+            return
+
+        try:
+            await self.db_pool.runInteraction(
+                "try_acquire_read_write_lock",
+                _try_acquire_read_write_lock_txn,
+            )
+        except self.database_engine.module.IntegrityError:
+            return None
+
+        lock = Lock(
+            self._reactor,
+            self._clock,
+            self,
+            read_write=True,
+            lock_name=lock_name,
+            lock_key=lock_key,
+            token=token,
+        )
+
+        self._live_read_write_lock_tokens[(lock_name, lock_key, token)] = lock
 
         return lock
 
@@ -212,20 +322,31 @@ def __init__(
         reactor: IReactorCore,
         clock: Clock,
         store: LockStore,
+        read_write: bool,
         lock_name: str,
         lock_key: str,
         token: str,
     ) -> None:
         self._reactor = reactor
         self._clock = clock
         self._store = store
+        self._read_write = read_write
         self._lock_name = lock_name
         self._lock_key = lock_key
 
         self._token = token
 
+        self._table = "worker_read_write_locks" if read_write else "worker_locks"
+
         self._looping_call = clock.looping_call(
-            self._renew, _RENEWAL_INTERVAL_MS, store, clock, lock_name, lock_key, token
+            self._renew,
+            _RENEWAL_INTERVAL_MS,
+            store,
+            clock,
+            read_write,
+            lock_name,
+            lock_key,
+            token,
         )
 
         self._dropped = False
@@ -235,6 +356,7 @@ def __init__(
     async def _renew(
         store: LockStore,
         clock: Clock,
+        read_write: bool,
         lock_name: str,
         lock_key: str,
         token: str,
@@ -245,8 +367,9 @@ async def _renew(
         don't end up with a reference to `self` in the reactor, which would stop
         this from being cleaned up if we dropped the context manager.
         """
+        table = "worker_read_write_locks" if read_write else "worker_locks"
         await store.db_pool.simple_update(
-            table="worker_locks",
+            table=table,
             keyvalues={
                 "lock_name": lock_name,
                 "lock_key": lock_key,
@@ -259,7 +382,7 @@ async def _renew(
     async def is_still_valid(self) -> bool:
         """Check if the lock is still held by us"""
         last_renewed_ts = await self._store.db_pool.simple_select_one_onecol(
-            table="worker_locks",
+            table=self._table,
             keyvalues={
                 "lock_name": self._lock_name,
                 "lock_key": self._lock_key,
@@ -301,7 +424,7 @@ async def release(self) -> None:
             self._looping_call.stop()
 
         await self._store.db_pool.simple_delete(
-            table="worker_locks",
+            table=self._table,
             keyvalues={
                 "lock_name": self._lock_name,
                 "lock_key": self._lock_key,
@@ -310,7 +433,12 @@ async def release(self) -> None:
             desc="drop_lock",
         )
 
-        self._store._live_tokens.pop((self._lock_name, self._lock_key), None)
+        if self._read_write:
+            self._store._live_read_write_lock_tokens.pop(
+                (self._lock_name, self._lock_key, self._token), None
+            )
+        else:
+            self._store._live_lock_tokens.pop((self._lock_name, self._lock_key), None)
 
         self._dropped = True
 

synapse/storage/schema/main/delta/78/03_read_write_locks.sql

@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
+/* Copyright 2023 The Matrix.org Foundation C.I.C
+ *
+ * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
+ * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
+ * You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ *    http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+ * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+ * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+
+
+-- We implement read/write style locks by using two tables with mutual foreign
+-- key constraints. Note that this implementation is vulnerable to starving
+-- writers if read locks repeatedly get acquired.
+--
+-- The first table (`worker_read_write_locks_mode`) indicates that a given lock
+-- has either been acquired in read mode *or* write mode, but not both. This is
+-- enforced by the unique constraint. Each instance of a lock being acquired is
+-- associated with a random `token`.
+--
+-- The second table (`worker_read_write_locks`) tracks who has currently
+-- acquired a given lock. It ensures that a lock can only be acquired once in
+-- write mode by using unique constraints.
+--
+-- The foreign key from the second to first table enforces that for any given
+-- lock the second table cannot have a mix of rows with read or write.
+--
+-- The foreign key from the first to second table enforces that we don't have a
+-- row for a lock in the first table if not in the second table. (Only supported
+-- on PostgreSQL).
+--
+--
+-- Furthermore, we add some triggers to automatically keep the first table up to
+-- date when inserting/deleting from the second table. This reduces the number
+-- of round trips needed to acquire and release locks, as those operations
+-- simply become an INSERT or DELETE. These triggers are added in a separate
+-- delta due to database specific syntax.
+
+
+-- A table to track whether a lock is currently acquired, and if so whether its
+-- in read or write mode.
+CREATE TABLE worker_read_write_locks_mode (
+    lock_name TEXT NOT NULL,
+    lock_key TEXT NOT NULL,
+    -- Whether this lock is in read (false) or write (true) mode
+    write_lock BOOLEAN NOT NULL,
+    -- A token that has currently acquired the lock. We need this so that we can
+    -- add a foreign constraint from this table to `worker_read_write_locks`.
+    token TEXT NOT NULL
+);
+
+-- Ensure that we can only have one row per lock
+CREATE UNIQUE INDEX worker_read_write_locks_mode_key ON worker_read_write_locks_mode (lock_name, lock_key);
+-- We need this (redundant) constraint so that we can have a foreign key
+-- constraint against this table.
+CREATE UNIQUE INDEX worker_read_write_locks_mode_type ON worker_read_write_locks_mode (lock_name, lock_key, write_lock);
+
+
+-- A table to track who has currently acquired a given lock.
+CREATE TABLE worker_read_write_locks (
+    lock_name TEXT NOT NULL,
+    lock_key TEXT NOT NULL,
+    -- We write the instance name to ease manual debugging, we don't ever read
+    -- from it.
+    -- Note: instance names aren't guarenteed to be unique.
+    instance_name TEXT NOT NULL,
+    -- A token that has currently acquired the lock. We need this so that we can
+    -- add a foreign constraint from this table to `worker_read_write_locks`.
+    write_lock BOOLEAN NOT NULL,
+    -- A random string generated each time an instance takes out a lock. Used by
+    -- the instance to tell whether the lock is still held by it (e.g. in the
+    -- case where the process stalls for a long time the lock may time out and
+    -- be taken out by another instance, at which point the original instance
+    -- can tell it no longer holds the lock as the tokens no longer match).
+    token TEXT NOT NULL,
+    last_renewed_ts BIGINT NOT NULL,
+
+    -- This constraint ensures that a given lock has only been acquired in read
+    -- xor write mode, but not both.
+    FOREIGN KEY (lock_name, lock_key, write_lock) REFERENCES worker_read_write_locks_mode (lock_name, lock_key, write_lock)
+);
+
+CREATE UNIQUE INDEX worker_read_write_locks_key ON worker_read_write_locks (lock_name, lock_key, token);
+-- Ensures that only one instance can acquire a lock in write mode at a time.
+CREATE UNIQUE INDEX worker_read_write_locks_write ON worker_read_write_locks (lock_name, lock_key) WHERE write_lock;