如何在单个进程中模拟SQL Server中的死锁?

时间:2012-07-19 21:59:40

标签: sql sql-server unit-testing deadlock raiserror

我们的客户端代码检测到死锁,等待一段时间,然后重试请求最多5次。重试逻辑根据错误号1205检测死锁。

我的目标是测试各种存储过程中的死锁重试逻辑和死锁处理。我可以使用两个不同的连接创建死锁。但是,我想在单个存储过程本身内模拟死锁。

死锁引发以下错误消息:

  

Msg 1205,Level 13,State 51,Line 1   交易(流程ID 66)是   锁定资源与另一个进程死锁并已被选中   作为死锁的受害者。重新运行该交易。

我在sys.messages中看到此错误消息:

select * from sys.messages where message_id = 1205 and language_id = 1033

message_id language_id severity  is_event_logged   text
1205       1033        13        0                 Transaction (Process ID %d) was deadlocked on %.*ls resources with another process and has been chosen as the deadlock victim. Rerun the transaction.

我无法使用RAISERROR提出此错误:

raiserror(1205, 13, 51)
  

Msg 2732,Level 16,State 1,Line 1
  错误号1205无效。   数字必须是13000到2147483647,不能是50000。

我们的死锁重试逻辑检查错误号是否为1205.死锁需要具有与正常死锁相同的消息ID,级别和状态。

有没有办法模拟死锁(使用RAISERROR或任何其他方法)并只用一个进程获取相同的消息号

我们的数据库使用SQL 2005兼容性,但我们的服务器在2005年到2008年之间有所不同。

5 个答案:

答案 0 :(得分:47)

正如许多人所指出的那样,答案是否定的,单个进程无法可靠地自行解锁。我想出了以下解决方案来模拟开发或测试系统上的死锁。

在SQL Server Management Studio窗口中运行以下脚本。 (仅在2008 R2上测试过。)您可以根据需要让它保持运行。

在您要模拟死锁的位置,插入对sp_simulatedeadlock的调用。运行你的进程,应该发生死锁。

完成测试后,停止SSMS查询并在底部运行清理代码。

/*
This script helps simulate deadlocks.  Run the entire script in a SQL query window.  It will continue running until stopped.
In the target script, insert a call to sp_simulatedeadlock where you want the deadlock to occur.
This stored procedure, also created below, causes the deadlock.
When you are done, stop the execution of this window and run the code in the cleanup section at the bottom.
*/
set nocount on

if object_id('DeadlockTest') is not null
    drop table DeadlockTest

create table DeadlockTest
(
    Deadlock_Key int primary key clustered,
    Deadlock_Count int
)
go

if exists (select * from sysobjects where id = object_id(N'sp_simulatedeadlock')
           AND objectproperty(id, N'IsProcedure') = 1)
drop procedure sp_simulatedeadlock
GO

create procedure sp_simulatedeadlock
(
    @MaxDeadlocks int = -1 -- specify the number of deadlocks you want; -1 = constant deadlocking
)
as begin

    set nocount on

    if object_id('DeadlockTest') is null
        return

    -- Volunteer to be a deadlock victim.
    set deadlock_priority low

    declare @DeadlockCount int

    select @DeadlockCount = Deadlock_Count -- this starts at 0
    from DeadlockTest
    where Deadlock_Key = 2

    -- Trace the start of each deadlock event.
    -- To listen to the trace event, setup a SQL Server Profiler trace with event class "UserConfigurable:0".
    -- Note that the user running this proc must have ALTER TRACE permission.
    -- Also note that there are only 128 characters allowed in the trace text.
    declare @trace nvarchar(128)

    if @MaxDeadlocks > 0 AND @DeadlockCount > @MaxDeadlocks
    begin

        set @trace = N'Deadlock Test @MaxDeadlocks: ' + cast(@MaxDeadlocks as nvarchar) + N' @DeadlockCount: ' + cast(@DeadlockCount as nvarchar) + N' Resetting deadlock count.  Will not cause deadlock.'
        exec sp_trace_generateevent
            @eventid = 82,  -- 82 = UserConfigurable:0 through 91 = UserConfigurable:9
            @userinfo = @trace

        -- Reset the number of deadlocks.
        -- Hopefully if there is an outer transaction, it will complete and persist this change.
        update DeadlockTest
        set Deadlock_Count = 0
        where Deadlock_Key = 2
        return
    end

    set @trace = N'Deadlock Test @MaxDeadlocks: ' + cast(@MaxDeadlocks as nvarchar) + N' @DeadlockCount: ' + cast(@DeadlockCount as nvarchar) + N' Simulating deadlock.'
    exec sp_trace_generateevent
        @eventid = 82,  -- 82 = UserConfigurable:0 through 91 = UserConfigurable:9
        @userinfo = @trace

    declare @StartedTransaction bit
    set @StartedTransaction = 0
    if @@trancount = 0
    begin
        set @StartedTransaction = 1
        begin transaction
    end

    -- lock 2nd record
    update DeadlockTest
    set Deadlock_Count = Deadlock_Count
    from DeadlockTest
    where Deadlock_Key = 2

    -- lock 1st record to cause deadlock
    update DeadlockTest
    set Deadlock_Count = Deadlock_Count
    from DeadlockTest
    where Deadlock_Key = 1

    if @StartedTransaction = 1
        rollback    
end
go

insert into DeadlockTest(Deadlock_Key, Deadlock_Count)
select 1, 0
union select 2, 0

-- Force other processes to be the deadlock victim.
set deadlock_priority high

begin transaction

while 1 = 1
begin

    begin try

        begin transaction

        -- lock 1st record
        update DeadlockTest
        set Deadlock_Count = Deadlock_Count
        from DeadlockTest
        where Deadlock_Key = 1

        waitfor delay '00:00:10'

        -- lock 2nd record (which will be locked when the target proc calls sp_simulatedeadlock)
        update DeadlockTest
        set Deadlock_Count = Deadlock_Count
        from DeadlockTest
        where Deadlock_Key = 2

        rollback

    end try
    begin catch
        print 'Error ' + convert(varchar(20), ERROR_NUMBER()) + ': ' + ERROR_MESSAGE()
        goto cleanup
    end catch

end

cleanup:

if @@trancount > 0
    rollback

drop procedure sp_simulatedeadlock
drop table DeadlockTest

答案 1 :(得分:12)

您可以通过运行

来利用Microsoft似乎并不急于修复的错误
use tempdb

begin tran
go

CREATE TYPE dbo.IntIntSet AS TABLE(
    Value0 Int NOT NULL,
    Value1 Int NOT NULL
)
go

declare @myPK dbo.IntIntSet;
go

rollback

此SQL将导致自身死锁。在Aaron Bertand的博客http://sqlperformance.com/2013/11/t-sql-queries/single-tx-deadlock

中有更多细节

答案 2 :(得分:5)

(显然我没有足够的声誉来添加评论。所以发帖作为答案。)

死锁至少需要两个进程。唯一的例外是查询内并行死锁,这种死锁是无法再现的。

但是,您可以在运行完全相同的查询(或sp)的两个进程上模拟死锁。一些想法here

答案 3 :(得分:1)

使用Parallel在C#中重现的最简单方法 e.g。

    var List = ... (add some items with same ids)

    Parallel.ForEach(List, 
        (item) =>
    {

        ReportsDataContext erdc = null;
        try
        {
            using (TransactionScope scope = new TransactionScope())
            {
                erdc = new ReportsDataContext("....connection....");
                var report = erdc.Report.Where(x => x.id == item.id).Select(x => x);
                report.Count++
                erdc.SubmitChanges();

                scope.Complete();
            }

            if (erdc != null)
                erdc.Dispose();
        }
        catch (Exception ex)
        {
            if (erdc != null)
                erdc.Dispose();
            ErrorLog.LogEx("multi thread victim", ex);
        }

更感兴趣的是如何在真正的跨线程情况下防止该错误?

答案 4 :(得分:1)

保罗,谢谢你的问题和后续答复。你的帖子激励我第一次加入Stack Overflow。

我在获得工作答案方面遇到了一些困难,我只想分享我为使其工作所做的微小改动。如果它能让人节省一天的生命,那么这是值得的。关键是在过程本身内开始并回滚sp_simulatedeadlock事务。我没有修改你答案中提到的程序。

DECLARE @DeadlockCounter INT = NULL

SELECT @DeadlockCounter = 0

WHILE @DeadlockCounter < 10
BEGIN
    BEGIN TRY
    /* The procedure was leaving uncommitted transactions, I rollback the transaction in the catch block */
        BEGIN tran simulate
            Exec sp_simulatedeadlock

        /* Code you want to deadlock */

        SELECT @DeadlockCounter = 10
    END TRY
    BEGIN CATCH
        Rollback tran simulate

        PRINT ERROR_MESSAGE()

        IF (ERROR_MESSAGE() LIKE '%deadlock%' OR ERROR_NUMBER() = 1205) AND @DeadlockCounter < 10
            BEGIN
                SELECT @DeadlockCounter +=1
                PRINT @DeadlockCounter

                IF @DeadlockCounter = 10
                BEGIN
                    RAISERROR('Deadlock limit exceeded or error raised', 16, 10);
                END
            END
    END CATCH
END