Deadlocks in Database Systems

Last modified: June 28, 2018

This article is written in: 🇺🇸

Deadlocks in Database Systems

Deadlocks are a critical issue in database systems that occur when two or more transactions are waiting indefinitely for each other to release locks on resources. This situation leads to a standstill where none of the involved transactions can proceed, potentially halting system operations and affecting performance.

Imagine a scenario where two transactions are each holding a lock on a resource the other needs. Neither can proceed until the other releases its lock, resulting in a deadlock.

Deadlock Scenario:

Transaction T1:
   Holds Lock on Resource A
   Requests Lock on Resource B (held by T2)
   
Transaction T2:
   Holds Lock on Resource B
   Requests Lock on Resource A (held by T1)
   
Result: Both transactions are waiting indefinitely.

In this illustration, Transaction T1 has locked Resource A and is waiting for Resource B, while Transaction T2 has locked Resource B and is waiting for Resource A. Since neither transaction can release its lock until it obtains the other resource, they are stuck in a deadlock.

After reading the material, you should be able to answer the following questions:

What is a deadlock in database systems, and how does it occur between transactions?
What are the common causes of deadlocks, such as resource contention and unordered lock acquisition?
How does the wait-for graph technique help in detecting deadlocks within a database system?
What strategies can be implemented to prevent deadlocks, including lock ordering and lock timeouts?
How does the database management system resolve deadlocks once they are detected, and what role does transaction rollback play in this process?

Understanding Deadlocks

Deadlocks arise from the way transactions acquire and hold locks on resources. They are particularly problematic in environments with high concurrency, where multiple transactions frequently access shared resources.

Consider the following real-world analogy: two drivers meet on a narrow bridge, each unwilling to reverse. Both are waiting for the other to move, and traffic comes to a standstill. Similarly, in a database, transactions can become deadlocked when they wait for each other to release resources.

Causes of Deadlocks

Several factors contribute to the occurrence of deadlocks in database systems, highlighting the importance of effective transaction and lock management:

High levels of resource contention increase the likelihood of deadlocks, as multiple transactions compete for the same resources simultaneously.
Unordered lock acquisition occurs when transactions acquire locks in different sequences, leading to circular wait conditions that result in deadlocks.
Transactions with long durations exacerbate the risk by holding locks for extended periods, increasing the chance of interfering with other ongoing transactions.
Using coarse lock granularity, such as locking entire tables instead of specific rows, amplifies the potential for deadlocks by unnecessarily restricting access to resources.

Deadlock Detection

Database systems use various methods to detect deadlocks and resolve them promptly.

Wait-For Graph

One common technique involves constructing a wait-for graph, which represents transactions as nodes and waiting relationships as edges. A cycle in this graph indicates a deadlock.

Wait-For Graph Example:

T1 --> T2 --> T3 --> T1

Cycle Detected: T1 is waiting for T2, T2 for T3, and T3 for T1.

In this graph, transactions are waiting in a circular chain, confirming the presence of a deadlock.

System Monitoring

Some database management systems (DBMS) automatically monitor for deadlocks by tracking lock requests and holdings. When a deadlock is detected, the system can take corrective action, such as terminating one of the involved transactions.

Deadlock Prevention Strategies

Preventing deadlocks involves designing transactions and systems to avoid the conditions that lead to them.

Lock Ordering

By acquiring locks in a consistent, predefined order, transactions reduce the risk of circular wait conditions.

Example:

All transactions acquire locks in the order: Resource A, then Resource B.

Transaction T1:
   Locks Resource A
   Locks Resource B

Transaction T2:
   Waits for Resource A (since T1 holds it)
   Locks Resource A
   Locks Resource B

In this approach, T2 cannot lock Resource B before locking Resource A, preventing a circular wait.

Lock Timeouts

Implementing timeouts for lock requests ensures that transactions do not wait indefinitely.

If a transaction cannot acquire a lock within a specified time, it aborts or retries.
This method avoids long waits but may result in increased transaction restarts.

Resource Hierarchies

Establishing a hierarchy for resources and enforcing that transactions can only lock higher-level resources after lower-level ones prevents deadlocks.

Deadlock Resolution

When prevention fails, and a deadlock occurs, the system must resolve it to maintain functionality.

Transaction Rollback

The DBMS can terminate one of the deadlocked transactions, rolling back its operations to free up resources.

The system applies victim selection criteria to decide which transaction to terminate, considering factors such as transaction age, priority level, or the amount of resources it holds.
After rollback, the aborted transaction can be restarted, with the expectation that it will complete successfully without encountering another deadlock in subsequent attempts.
Rollback strategies are designed to minimize disruption, ensuring that only the transaction with the least impact on the overall system is terminated.
Implementing retry mechanisms with back-off strategies prevents immediate reoccurrence of the same conflict, allowing smoother resolution of resource contention.

User Intervention

In some cases, database administrators may need to manually identify and resolve deadlocks, especially if they occur frequently or impact critical operations.

Practical Examples

Let's look at a SQL example to illustrate how deadlocks can happen and be addressed.

Transaction T1:

BEGIN TRANSACTION;
UPDATE Accounts SET Balance = Balance - 100 WHERE AccountID = 1;
-- Locks row with AccountID = 1
WAITFOR DELAY '00:00:05'; -- Simulate processing time
UPDATE Accounts SET Balance = Balance + 100 WHERE AccountID = 2;
-- Requests lock on row with AccountID = 2
COMMIT;

Transaction T2:

BEGIN TRANSACTION;
UPDATE Accounts SET Balance = Balance - 50 WHERE AccountID = 2;
-- Locks row with AccountID = 2
WAITFOR DELAY '00:00:05'; -- Simulate processing time
UPDATE Accounts SET Balance = Balance + 50 WHERE AccountID = 1;
-- Requests lock on row with AccountID = 1
COMMIT;

Interpretation:

T1 locks AccountID 1 and requests AccountID 2.
T2 locks AccountID 2 and requests AccountID 1.
Both transactions are waiting for each other to release locks, resulting in a deadlock.

Resolution:

The DBMS detects the deadlock and rolls back one of the transactions, say T2.
T2's changes are undone, and it can be retried after T1 completes.

Best Practices to Avoid Deadlocks

To minimize the risk of deadlocks, it is essential to follow best practices that promote efficient resource utilization and transaction management:

Enforcing consistent lock ordering ensures that all transactions acquire locks in a predefined sequence, effectively preventing circular wait conditions.
Designing short transactions reduces the time locks are held, minimizing contention and the likelihood of deadlocks.
Applying reduced lock scope by locking only the necessary resources at the most granular level enhances concurrency and limits unnecessary locking conflicts.
Avoiding user interaction within transactions prevents prolonged lock durations, as waiting for user input can significantly increase the chances of deadlocks.
Regularly monitoring and analyzing deadlocks through system logs helps identify recurring patterns and refine strategies to prevent similar issues in the future.

Deadlocks in Multithreaded Applications

Deadlocks aren't limited to database transactions; they can also occur in multithreaded applications when threads contend for shared resources.

Thread Deadlock Example:

Thread A:
   Locks Mutex M1
   Waits for Mutex M2

Thread B:
   Locks Mutex M2
   Waits for Mutex M1

Applying similar strategies of lock ordering and timeouts can help prevent deadlocks in these environments.

Deadlock vs. Livelock

Understanding the difference between deadlocks and livelocks is crucial for effectively managing transaction conflicts:

A deadlock occurs when transactions wait indefinitely for each other to release locks, resulting in no progress and requiring external intervention to resolve.
In contrast, a livelock happens when transactions continuously change state in reaction to each other but fail to make any progress, often due to overly aggressive retry mechanisms or conflict resolution strategies.
Addressing livelocks typically involves introducing delays or back-off strategies, allowing transactions to proceed by reducing contention.

Additional Considerations

Beyond direct locking mechanisms, other factors play a role in preventing deadlocks and improving system efficiency:

Selecting the appropriate transaction isolation level directly impacts locking behavior, with higher isolation levels increasing the risk of deadlocks but ensuring better data consistency.
Configuring the deadlock detection frequency in the database management system can strike a balance between performance overhead and the timely resolution of deadlock conditions.
Thoughtful application design, such as adhering to consistent resource access patterns and minimizing resource contention, significantly reduces the likelihood of deadlocks occurring.
Implementing transaction retries with exponential back-off ensures that transient conflicts do not escalate into persistent livelocks or deadlocks.
Monitoring and analyzing database performance metrics provides insights into contention hotspots and informs adjustments to locking strategies and system configurations.