-
Type:
Bug
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
Priority:
Major - P3
-
Affects Version/s: None
-
Component/s: None
-
None
-
Catalog and Routing
-
Fully Compatible
-
ALL
-
200
-
None
-
None
-
None
-
None
-
None
-
None
-
None
Several functions in ShardingRecoveryService take a collection lock on some arbitrary collection, then they use a DBDirectClient which could take more locks. If the first lock skipped the RSTL it's possible the second one takes it, creating a lock order inversion. We shouldn't skip the RSTL in those cases.