--echo #
--echo # Bug #23755664 DEADLOCK WITH 3 CONCURRENT DELETES BY UNIQUE KEY
--echo #

--source include/have_innodb.inc
--source include/have_debug.inc
--source include/have_debug_sync.inc
--source include/count_sessions.inc

--connection default
# There are various scenarious in which a transaction already holds "half"
# of a record lock (for example, a lock on the record but not on the gap)
# and wishes to "upgrade it" to a full lock (i.e. on both gap and record).
# This is often a cause for a deadlock, if there is another transaction
# which is already waiting for the lock being blocked by us:
# 1. our granted lock for one half
# 2. her waiting lock for the same half
# 3. our waiting lock for the whole

#
# SCENARIO 1
#
# In this scenario, three different threads try to delete the same row,
# identified by a secondary index key.
# This kind of operation (besides LOCK_IX on a table) requires
# an LOCK_REC_NOT_GAP|LOCK_REC|LOCK_X lock on a secondary index
# 1. `deleter` is the first to get the required lock
# 2. `holder` enqueues a waiting lock
# 3. `waiter` enqueues right after `holder`
# 4. `deleter` commits, releasing the lock, and granting it to `holder`
# 5. `holder` now observes that the row was deleted, so it needs to
#    "seal the gap", by obtaining a LOCK_X|LOCK_REC, but..
# 6. this causes a deadlock between `holder` and `waiter`
#
# This scenario does not fail if MDEV-10962 is not fixed because of MDEV-30225
# fix, as the 'holder' does not "seal the gap" after 'deleter' was committed,
# because it was initially sealed, as row_search_mvcc() requests next-key lock
# after MDEV-30225 fix in the case when it requested not-gap lock before the
# fix.
#
# But let the scenario be in the tests, because it can fail if MDEV-30225
# related code is changed

CREATE TABLE `t`(
  `id` INT,
  `a` INT DEFAULT NULL,
  PRIMARY KEY(`id`),
  UNIQUE KEY `u`(`a`)
) ENGINE=InnoDB;

INSERT INTO t (`id`,`a`) VALUES
  (1,1),
  (2,9999),
  (3,10000);

--connect(deleter,localhost,root,,)
--connect(holder,localhost,root,,)
--connect(waiter,localhost,root,,)


--connection deleter
  SET DEBUG_SYNC =
    'lock_sec_rec_read_check_and_lock_has_locked
      SIGNAL deleter_has_locked
      WAIT_FOR waiter_has_locked';
  --send DELETE FROM t WHERE a = 9999

--connection holder
  SET DEBUG_SYNC=
    'now WAIT_FOR deleter_has_locked';
  SET DEBUG_SYNC=
    'lock_sec_rec_read_check_and_lock_has_locked SIGNAL holder_has_locked';
  --send DELETE FROM t WHERE a = 9999

--connection waiter
  SET DEBUG_SYNC=
    'now WAIT_FOR holder_has_locked';
  SET DEBUG_SYNC=
    'lock_sec_rec_read_check_and_lock_has_locked SIGNAL waiter_has_locked';
  --send DELETE FROM t WHERE a = 9999

--connection deleter
  --reap

--connection holder
  --reap

--connection waiter
  --reap

--connection default

--disconnect deleter
--disconnect holder
--disconnect waiter

DROP TABLE `t`;
SET DEBUG_SYNC='reset';

# SCENARIO 2
#
# Here, we form a situation in which con1 has LOCK_REC_NOT_GAP on rows 1 and 2
# con2 waits for lock on row 1, and then con1 wants to upgrade the lock on row 1,
# which might cause a deadlock, unless con1 properly notices that even though the
# lock on row 1 can not be upgraded, a separate LOCK_GAP can be obtaied easily.

CREATE TABLE `t`(
  `id` INT NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY
) ENGINE=InnoDB;

INSERT INTO t (`id`) VALUES (1), (2);

--connect(holder,localhost,root,,)
--connect(waiter,localhost,root,,)

--connection holder
  BEGIN;
  SELECT id FROM t WHERE id=1 FOR UPDATE;
  SELECT id FROM t WHERE id=2 FOR UPDATE;

--connection waiter
  SET DEBUG_SYNC=
    'lock_wait_before_suspend SIGNAL waiter_will_wait';
  --send SELECT id FROM t WHERE id = 1 FOR UPDATE

--connection holder
  SET DEBUG_SYNC=
    'now WAIT_FOR waiter_will_wait';
  SELECT * FROM t FOR UPDATE;
  COMMIT;

--connection waiter
  --reap

--connection default

--disconnect holder
--disconnect waiter

DROP TABLE `t`;
SET DEBUG_SYNC='reset';

--source include/wait_until_count_sessions.inc