You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
rocksdb/utilities/transactions/optimistic_transaction.cc

210 lines
6.9 KiB

// Copyright (c) 2011-present, Facebook, Inc. All rights reserved.
// This source code is licensed under both the GPLv2 (found in the
// COPYING file in the root directory) and Apache 2.0 License
// (found in the LICENSE.Apache file in the root directory).
#include "utilities/transactions/optimistic_transaction.h"
Improve memory efficiency of many OptimisticTransactionDBs (#11439) Summary: Currently it's easy to use a ton of memory with many small OptimisticTransactionDB instances, because each one by default allocates a million mutexes (40 bytes each on my compiler) for validating transactions. It even puts a lot of pressure on the allocator by allocating each one individually! In this change: * Create a new object and option that enables sharing these buckets of mutexes between instances. This is generally good for load balancing potential contention as various DBs become hotter or colder with txn writes. About the only cases where this sharing wouldn't make sense (e.g. each DB usually written by one thread) are cases that would be better off with OccValidationPolicy::kValidateSerial which doesn't use the buckets anyway. * Allocate the mutexes in a contiguous array, for efficiency * Add an option to ensure the mutexes are cache-aligned. In several other places we use cache-aligned mutexes but OptimisticTransactionDB historically does not. It should be a space-time trade-off the user can choose. * Provide some visibility into the memory used by the mutex buckets with an ApproximateMemoryUsage() function (also used in unit testing) * Share code with other users of "striped" mutexes, appropriate refactoring for customization & efficiency (e.g. using FastRange instead of modulus) Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/11439 Test Plan: unit tests added. Ran sized-up versions of stress test in unit test, including a before-and-after performance test showing no consistent difference. (NOTE: OptimisticTransactionDB not currently covered by db_stress!) Reviewed By: ltamasi Differential Revision: D45796393 Pulled By: pdillinger fbshipit-source-id: ae2b3a26ad91ceeec15debcdc63ff48df6736a54
2 years ago
#include <cstdint>
#include <string>
#include "db/column_family.h"
#include "db/db_impl/db_impl.h"
#include "rocksdb/comparator.h"
#include "rocksdb/db.h"
#include "rocksdb/status.h"
#include "rocksdb/utilities/optimistic_transaction_db.h"
#include "util/cast_util.h"
Improve memory efficiency of many OptimisticTransactionDBs (#11439) Summary: Currently it's easy to use a ton of memory with many small OptimisticTransactionDB instances, because each one by default allocates a million mutexes (40 bytes each on my compiler) for validating transactions. It even puts a lot of pressure on the allocator by allocating each one individually! In this change: * Create a new object and option that enables sharing these buckets of mutexes between instances. This is generally good for load balancing potential contention as various DBs become hotter or colder with txn writes. About the only cases where this sharing wouldn't make sense (e.g. each DB usually written by one thread) are cases that would be better off with OccValidationPolicy::kValidateSerial which doesn't use the buckets anyway. * Allocate the mutexes in a contiguous array, for efficiency * Add an option to ensure the mutexes are cache-aligned. In several other places we use cache-aligned mutexes but OptimisticTransactionDB historically does not. It should be a space-time trade-off the user can choose. * Provide some visibility into the memory used by the mutex buckets with an ApproximateMemoryUsage() function (also used in unit testing) * Share code with other users of "striped" mutexes, appropriate refactoring for customization & efficiency (e.g. using FastRange instead of modulus) Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/11439 Test Plan: unit tests added. Ran sized-up versions of stress test in unit test, including a before-and-after performance test showing no consistent difference. (NOTE: OptimisticTransactionDB not currently covered by db_stress!) Reviewed By: ltamasi Differential Revision: D45796393 Pulled By: pdillinger fbshipit-source-id: ae2b3a26ad91ceeec15debcdc63ff48df6736a54
2 years ago
#include "util/defer.h"
#include "util/string_util.h"
#include "utilities/transactions/lock/point/point_lock_tracker.h"
#include "utilities/transactions/optimistic_transaction.h"
#include "utilities/transactions/optimistic_transaction_db_impl.h"
#include "utilities/transactions/transaction_util.h"
namespace ROCKSDB_NAMESPACE {
struct WriteOptions;
OptimisticTransaction::OptimisticTransaction(
OptimisticTransactionDB* txn_db, const WriteOptions& write_options,
const OptimisticTransactionOptions& txn_options)
: TransactionBaseImpl(txn_db->GetBaseDB(), write_options,
PointLockTrackerFactory::Get()),
txn_db_(txn_db) {
Initialize(txn_options);
}
void OptimisticTransaction::Initialize(
const OptimisticTransactionOptions& txn_options) {
if (txn_options.set_snapshot) {
SetSnapshot();
}
}
void OptimisticTransaction::Reinitialize(
OptimisticTransactionDB* txn_db, const WriteOptions& write_options,
const OptimisticTransactionOptions& txn_options) {
TransactionBaseImpl::Reinitialize(txn_db->GetBaseDB(), write_options);
Initialize(txn_options);
}
OptimisticTransaction::~OptimisticTransaction() {}
void OptimisticTransaction::Clear() { TransactionBaseImpl::Clear(); }
Status OptimisticTransaction::Prepare() {
return Status::InvalidArgument(
"Two phase commit not supported for optimistic transactions.");
}
Status OptimisticTransaction::Commit() {
auto txn_db_impl = static_cast_with_check<OptimisticTransactionDBImpl,
OptimisticTransactionDB>(txn_db_);
assert(txn_db_impl);
switch (txn_db_impl->GetValidatePolicy()) {
case OccValidationPolicy::kValidateParallel:
return CommitWithParallelValidate();
case OccValidationPolicy::kValidateSerial:
return CommitWithSerialValidate();
default:
assert(0);
}
// unreachable, just void compiler complain
return Status::OK();
}
Status OptimisticTransaction::CommitWithSerialValidate() {
// Set up callback which will call CheckTransactionForConflicts() to
// check whether this transaction is safe to be committed.
OptimisticTransactionCallback callback(this);
DBImpl* db_impl = static_cast_with_check<DBImpl>(db_->GetRootDB());
Status s = db_impl->WriteWithCallback(
write_options_, GetWriteBatch()->GetWriteBatch(), &callback);
if (s.ok()) {
Clear();
}
return s;
}
Status OptimisticTransaction::CommitWithParallelValidate() {
auto txn_db_impl = static_cast_with_check<OptimisticTransactionDBImpl,
OptimisticTransactionDB>(txn_db_);
assert(txn_db_impl);
DBImpl* db_impl = static_cast_with_check<DBImpl>(db_->GetRootDB());
assert(db_impl);
Improve memory efficiency of many OptimisticTransactionDBs (#11439) Summary: Currently it's easy to use a ton of memory with many small OptimisticTransactionDB instances, because each one by default allocates a million mutexes (40 bytes each on my compiler) for validating transactions. It even puts a lot of pressure on the allocator by allocating each one individually! In this change: * Create a new object and option that enables sharing these buckets of mutexes between instances. This is generally good for load balancing potential contention as various DBs become hotter or colder with txn writes. About the only cases where this sharing wouldn't make sense (e.g. each DB usually written by one thread) are cases that would be better off with OccValidationPolicy::kValidateSerial which doesn't use the buckets anyway. * Allocate the mutexes in a contiguous array, for efficiency * Add an option to ensure the mutexes are cache-aligned. In several other places we use cache-aligned mutexes but OptimisticTransactionDB historically does not. It should be a space-time trade-off the user can choose. * Provide some visibility into the memory used by the mutex buckets with an ApproximateMemoryUsage() function (also used in unit testing) * Share code with other users of "striped" mutexes, appropriate refactoring for customization & efficiency (e.g. using FastRange instead of modulus) Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/11439 Test Plan: unit tests added. Ran sized-up versions of stress test in unit test, including a before-and-after performance test showing no consistent difference. (NOTE: OptimisticTransactionDB not currently covered by db_stress!) Reviewed By: ltamasi Differential Revision: D45796393 Pulled By: pdillinger fbshipit-source-id: ae2b3a26ad91ceeec15debcdc63ff48df6736a54
2 years ago
std::set<port::Mutex*> lk_ptrs;
Replace tracked_keys with a new LockTracker interface in TransactionDB (#7013) Summary: We're going to support more locking protocols such as range lock in transaction. However, in current design, `TransactionBase` has a member `tracked_keys` which assumes that point lock (lock a single key) is used, and is used in snapshot checking (isolation protocol). When using range lock, we may use read committed instead of snapshot checking as the isolation protocol. The most significant usage scenarios of `tracked_keys` are: 1. pessimistic transaction uses it to track the locked keys, and unlock these keys when commit or rollback. 2. optimistic transaction does not lock keys upfront, it only tracks the lock intentions in tracked_keys, and do write conflict checking when commit. 3. each `SavePoint` tracks the keys that are locked since the `SavePoint`, `RollbackToSavePoint` or `PopSavePoint` relies on both the tracked keys in `SavePoint`s and `tracked_keys`. Based on these scenarios, if we can abstract out a `LockTracker` interface to hold a set of tracked locks (can be keys or key ranges), and have methods that can be composed together to implement the scenarios, then `tracked_keys` can be an internal data structure of one implementation of `LockTracker`. See `utilities/transactions/lock/lock_tracker.h` for the detailed interface design, and `utilities/transactions/lock/point_lock_tracker.cc` for the implementation. In the future, a `RangeLockTracker` can be implemented to track range locks without affecting other components. After this PR, a clean interface for lock manager should be possible, and then ideally, we can have pluggable locking protocols. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/7013 Test Plan: Run `transaction_test` and `optimistic_transaction_test`. Reviewed By: ajkr Differential Revision: D22163706 Pulled By: cheng-chang fbshipit-source-id: f2860577b5334e31dd2994f5bc6d7c40d502b1b4
4 years ago
std::unique_ptr<LockTracker::ColumnFamilyIterator> cf_it(
tracked_locks_->GetColumnFamilyIterator());
assert(cf_it != nullptr);
while (cf_it->HasNext()) {
ColumnFamilyId cf = cf_it->Next();
Improve memory efficiency of many OptimisticTransactionDBs (#11439) Summary: Currently it's easy to use a ton of memory with many small OptimisticTransactionDB instances, because each one by default allocates a million mutexes (40 bytes each on my compiler) for validating transactions. It even puts a lot of pressure on the allocator by allocating each one individually! In this change: * Create a new object and option that enables sharing these buckets of mutexes between instances. This is generally good for load balancing potential contention as various DBs become hotter or colder with txn writes. About the only cases where this sharing wouldn't make sense (e.g. each DB usually written by one thread) are cases that would be better off with OccValidationPolicy::kValidateSerial which doesn't use the buckets anyway. * Allocate the mutexes in a contiguous array, for efficiency * Add an option to ensure the mutexes are cache-aligned. In several other places we use cache-aligned mutexes but OptimisticTransactionDB historically does not. It should be a space-time trade-off the user can choose. * Provide some visibility into the memory used by the mutex buckets with an ApproximateMemoryUsage() function (also used in unit testing) * Share code with other users of "striped" mutexes, appropriate refactoring for customization & efficiency (e.g. using FastRange instead of modulus) Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/11439 Test Plan: unit tests added. Ran sized-up versions of stress test in unit test, including a before-and-after performance test showing no consistent difference. (NOTE: OptimisticTransactionDB not currently covered by db_stress!) Reviewed By: ltamasi Differential Revision: D45796393 Pulled By: pdillinger fbshipit-source-id: ae2b3a26ad91ceeec15debcdc63ff48df6736a54
2 years ago
// To avoid the same key(s) contending across CFs or DBs, seed the
// hash independently.
uint64_t seed = reinterpret_cast<uintptr_t>(db_impl) +
uint64_t{0xb83c07fbc6ced699} /*random prime*/ * cf;
Replace tracked_keys with a new LockTracker interface in TransactionDB (#7013) Summary: We're going to support more locking protocols such as range lock in transaction. However, in current design, `TransactionBase` has a member `tracked_keys` which assumes that point lock (lock a single key) is used, and is used in snapshot checking (isolation protocol). When using range lock, we may use read committed instead of snapshot checking as the isolation protocol. The most significant usage scenarios of `tracked_keys` are: 1. pessimistic transaction uses it to track the locked keys, and unlock these keys when commit or rollback. 2. optimistic transaction does not lock keys upfront, it only tracks the lock intentions in tracked_keys, and do write conflict checking when commit. 3. each `SavePoint` tracks the keys that are locked since the `SavePoint`, `RollbackToSavePoint` or `PopSavePoint` relies on both the tracked keys in `SavePoint`s and `tracked_keys`. Based on these scenarios, if we can abstract out a `LockTracker` interface to hold a set of tracked locks (can be keys or key ranges), and have methods that can be composed together to implement the scenarios, then `tracked_keys` can be an internal data structure of one implementation of `LockTracker`. See `utilities/transactions/lock/lock_tracker.h` for the detailed interface design, and `utilities/transactions/lock/point_lock_tracker.cc` for the implementation. In the future, a `RangeLockTracker` can be implemented to track range locks without affecting other components. After this PR, a clean interface for lock manager should be possible, and then ideally, we can have pluggable locking protocols. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/7013 Test Plan: Run `transaction_test` and `optimistic_transaction_test`. Reviewed By: ajkr Differential Revision: D22163706 Pulled By: cheng-chang fbshipit-source-id: f2860577b5334e31dd2994f5bc6d7c40d502b1b4
4 years ago
std::unique_ptr<LockTracker::KeyIterator> key_it(
tracked_locks_->GetKeyIterator(cf));
assert(key_it != nullptr);
while (key_it->HasNext()) {
Improve memory efficiency of many OptimisticTransactionDBs (#11439) Summary: Currently it's easy to use a ton of memory with many small OptimisticTransactionDB instances, because each one by default allocates a million mutexes (40 bytes each on my compiler) for validating transactions. It even puts a lot of pressure on the allocator by allocating each one individually! In this change: * Create a new object and option that enables sharing these buckets of mutexes between instances. This is generally good for load balancing potential contention as various DBs become hotter or colder with txn writes. About the only cases where this sharing wouldn't make sense (e.g. each DB usually written by one thread) are cases that would be better off with OccValidationPolicy::kValidateSerial which doesn't use the buckets anyway. * Allocate the mutexes in a contiguous array, for efficiency * Add an option to ensure the mutexes are cache-aligned. In several other places we use cache-aligned mutexes but OptimisticTransactionDB historically does not. It should be a space-time trade-off the user can choose. * Provide some visibility into the memory used by the mutex buckets with an ApproximateMemoryUsage() function (also used in unit testing) * Share code with other users of "striped" mutexes, appropriate refactoring for customization & efficiency (e.g. using FastRange instead of modulus) Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/11439 Test Plan: unit tests added. Ran sized-up versions of stress test in unit test, including a before-and-after performance test showing no consistent difference. (NOTE: OptimisticTransactionDB not currently covered by db_stress!) Reviewed By: ltamasi Differential Revision: D45796393 Pulled By: pdillinger fbshipit-source-id: ae2b3a26ad91ceeec15debcdc63ff48df6736a54
2 years ago
auto lock_bucket_ptr = &txn_db_impl->GetLockBucket(key_it->Next(), seed);
TEST_SYNC_POINT_CALLBACK(
"OptimisticTransaction::CommitWithParallelValidate::lock_bucket_ptr",
lock_bucket_ptr);
lk_ptrs.insert(lock_bucket_ptr);
}
}
// NOTE: in a single txn, all bucket-locks are taken in ascending order.
// In this way, txns from different threads all obey this rule so that
// deadlock can be avoided.
Improve memory efficiency of many OptimisticTransactionDBs (#11439) Summary: Currently it's easy to use a ton of memory with many small OptimisticTransactionDB instances, because each one by default allocates a million mutexes (40 bytes each on my compiler) for validating transactions. It even puts a lot of pressure on the allocator by allocating each one individually! In this change: * Create a new object and option that enables sharing these buckets of mutexes between instances. This is generally good for load balancing potential contention as various DBs become hotter or colder with txn writes. About the only cases where this sharing wouldn't make sense (e.g. each DB usually written by one thread) are cases that would be better off with OccValidationPolicy::kValidateSerial which doesn't use the buckets anyway. * Allocate the mutexes in a contiguous array, for efficiency * Add an option to ensure the mutexes are cache-aligned. In several other places we use cache-aligned mutexes but OptimisticTransactionDB historically does not. It should be a space-time trade-off the user can choose. * Provide some visibility into the memory used by the mutex buckets with an ApproximateMemoryUsage() function (also used in unit testing) * Share code with other users of "striped" mutexes, appropriate refactoring for customization & efficiency (e.g. using FastRange instead of modulus) Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/11439 Test Plan: unit tests added. Ran sized-up versions of stress test in unit test, including a before-and-after performance test showing no consistent difference. (NOTE: OptimisticTransactionDB not currently covered by db_stress!) Reviewed By: ltamasi Differential Revision: D45796393 Pulled By: pdillinger fbshipit-source-id: ae2b3a26ad91ceeec15debcdc63ff48df6736a54
2 years ago
for (auto v : lk_ptrs) {
// WART: if an exception is thrown during a Lock(), previously locked will
// not be Unlock()ed. But a vector of MutexLock is likely inefficient.
v->Lock();
}
Improve memory efficiency of many OptimisticTransactionDBs (#11439) Summary: Currently it's easy to use a ton of memory with many small OptimisticTransactionDB instances, because each one by default allocates a million mutexes (40 bytes each on my compiler) for validating transactions. It even puts a lot of pressure on the allocator by allocating each one individually! In this change: * Create a new object and option that enables sharing these buckets of mutexes between instances. This is generally good for load balancing potential contention as various DBs become hotter or colder with txn writes. About the only cases where this sharing wouldn't make sense (e.g. each DB usually written by one thread) are cases that would be better off with OccValidationPolicy::kValidateSerial which doesn't use the buckets anyway. * Allocate the mutexes in a contiguous array, for efficiency * Add an option to ensure the mutexes are cache-aligned. In several other places we use cache-aligned mutexes but OptimisticTransactionDB historically does not. It should be a space-time trade-off the user can choose. * Provide some visibility into the memory used by the mutex buckets with an ApproximateMemoryUsage() function (also used in unit testing) * Share code with other users of "striped" mutexes, appropriate refactoring for customization & efficiency (e.g. using FastRange instead of modulus) Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/11439 Test Plan: unit tests added. Ran sized-up versions of stress test in unit test, including a before-and-after performance test showing no consistent difference. (NOTE: OptimisticTransactionDB not currently covered by db_stress!) Reviewed By: ltamasi Differential Revision: D45796393 Pulled By: pdillinger fbshipit-source-id: ae2b3a26ad91ceeec15debcdc63ff48df6736a54
2 years ago
Defer unlocks([&]() {
for (auto v : lk_ptrs) {
v->Unlock();
}
});
Replace tracked_keys with a new LockTracker interface in TransactionDB (#7013) Summary: We're going to support more locking protocols such as range lock in transaction. However, in current design, `TransactionBase` has a member `tracked_keys` which assumes that point lock (lock a single key) is used, and is used in snapshot checking (isolation protocol). When using range lock, we may use read committed instead of snapshot checking as the isolation protocol. The most significant usage scenarios of `tracked_keys` are: 1. pessimistic transaction uses it to track the locked keys, and unlock these keys when commit or rollback. 2. optimistic transaction does not lock keys upfront, it only tracks the lock intentions in tracked_keys, and do write conflict checking when commit. 3. each `SavePoint` tracks the keys that are locked since the `SavePoint`, `RollbackToSavePoint` or `PopSavePoint` relies on both the tracked keys in `SavePoint`s and `tracked_keys`. Based on these scenarios, if we can abstract out a `LockTracker` interface to hold a set of tracked locks (can be keys or key ranges), and have methods that can be composed together to implement the scenarios, then `tracked_keys` can be an internal data structure of one implementation of `LockTracker`. See `utilities/transactions/lock/lock_tracker.h` for the detailed interface design, and `utilities/transactions/lock/point_lock_tracker.cc` for the implementation. In the future, a `RangeLockTracker` can be implemented to track range locks without affecting other components. After this PR, a clean interface for lock manager should be possible, and then ideally, we can have pluggable locking protocols. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/7013 Test Plan: Run `transaction_test` and `optimistic_transaction_test`. Reviewed By: ajkr Differential Revision: D22163706 Pulled By: cheng-chang fbshipit-source-id: f2860577b5334e31dd2994f5bc6d7c40d502b1b4
4 years ago
Status s = TransactionUtil::CheckKeysForConflicts(db_impl, *tracked_locks_,
true /* cache_only */);
if (!s.ok()) {
return s;
}
s = db_impl->Write(write_options_, GetWriteBatch()->GetWriteBatch());
if (s.ok()) {
Clear();
}
return s;
}
Status OptimisticTransaction::Rollback() {
Clear();
return Status::OK();
}
// Record this key so that we can check it for conflicts at commit time.
//
// 'exclusive' is unused for OptimisticTransaction.
Status OptimisticTransaction::TryLock(ColumnFamilyHandle* column_family,
const Slice& key, bool read_only,
bool exclusive, const bool do_validate,
const bool assume_tracked) {
assert(!assume_tracked); // not supported
(void)assume_tracked;
if (!do_validate) {
return Status::OK();
}
uint32_t cfh_id = GetColumnFamilyID(column_family);
SetSnapshotIfNeeded();
SequenceNumber seq;
if (snapshot_) {
seq = snapshot_->GetSequenceNumber();
} else {
seq = db_->GetLatestSequenceNumber();
}
std::string key_str = key.ToString();
TrackKey(cfh_id, key_str, seq, read_only, exclusive);
// Always return OK. Confilct checking will happen at commit time.
return Status::OK();
}
// Returns OK if it is safe to commit this transaction. Returns Status::Busy
// if there are read or write conflicts that would prevent us from committing OR
// if we can not determine whether there would be any such conflicts.
//
// Should only be called on writer thread in order to avoid any race conditions
// in detecting write conflicts.
Status OptimisticTransaction::CheckTransactionForConflicts(DB* db) {
auto db_impl = static_cast_with_check<DBImpl>(db);
// Since we are on the write thread and do not want to block other writers,
// we will do a cache-only conflict check. This can result in TryAgain
// getting returned if there is not sufficient memtable history to check
// for conflicts.
Replace tracked_keys with a new LockTracker interface in TransactionDB (#7013) Summary: We're going to support more locking protocols such as range lock in transaction. However, in current design, `TransactionBase` has a member `tracked_keys` which assumes that point lock (lock a single key) is used, and is used in snapshot checking (isolation protocol). When using range lock, we may use read committed instead of snapshot checking as the isolation protocol. The most significant usage scenarios of `tracked_keys` are: 1. pessimistic transaction uses it to track the locked keys, and unlock these keys when commit or rollback. 2. optimistic transaction does not lock keys upfront, it only tracks the lock intentions in tracked_keys, and do write conflict checking when commit. 3. each `SavePoint` tracks the keys that are locked since the `SavePoint`, `RollbackToSavePoint` or `PopSavePoint` relies on both the tracked keys in `SavePoint`s and `tracked_keys`. Based on these scenarios, if we can abstract out a `LockTracker` interface to hold a set of tracked locks (can be keys or key ranges), and have methods that can be composed together to implement the scenarios, then `tracked_keys` can be an internal data structure of one implementation of `LockTracker`. See `utilities/transactions/lock/lock_tracker.h` for the detailed interface design, and `utilities/transactions/lock/point_lock_tracker.cc` for the implementation. In the future, a `RangeLockTracker` can be implemented to track range locks without affecting other components. After this PR, a clean interface for lock manager should be possible, and then ideally, we can have pluggable locking protocols. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/7013 Test Plan: Run `transaction_test` and `optimistic_transaction_test`. Reviewed By: ajkr Differential Revision: D22163706 Pulled By: cheng-chang fbshipit-source-id: f2860577b5334e31dd2994f5bc6d7c40d502b1b4
4 years ago
return TransactionUtil::CheckKeysForConflicts(db_impl, *tracked_locks_,
true /* cache_only */);
}
Status OptimisticTransaction::SetName(const TransactionName& /* unused */) {
return Status::InvalidArgument("Optimistic transactions cannot be named.");
}
} // namespace ROCKSDB_NAMESPACE