postgresql/src/backend/executor/nodeSamplescan.c

Ignoring revisions in .git-blame-ignore-revs. Click here to bypass and see the normal blame view.

380 lines
9.5 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

/*-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*
* nodeSamplescan.c
* Support routines for sample scans of relations (table sampling).
*
* Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2023, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
* Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California
*
*
* IDENTIFICATION
* src/backend/executor/nodeSamplescan.c
*
*-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*/
#include "postgres.h"
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
#include "access/relscan.h"
tableam: Add and use scan APIs. Too allow table accesses to be not directly dependent on heap, several new abstractions are needed. Specifically: 1) Heap scans need to be generalized into table scans. Do this by introducing TableScanDesc, which will be the "base class" for individual AMs. This contains the AM independent fields from HeapScanDesc. The previous heap_{beginscan,rescan,endscan} et al. have been replaced with a table_ version. There's no direct replacement for heap_getnext(), as that returned a HeapTuple, which is undesirable for a other AMs. Instead there's table_scan_getnextslot(). But note that heap_getnext() lives on, it's still used widely to access catalog tables. This is achieved by new scan_begin, scan_end, scan_rescan, scan_getnextslot callbacks. 2) The portion of parallel scans that's shared between backends need to be able to do so without the user doing per-AM work. To achieve that new parallelscan_{estimate, initialize, reinitialize} callbacks are introduced, which operate on a new ParallelTableScanDesc, which again can be subclassed by AMs. As it is likely that several AMs are going to be block oriented, block oriented callbacks that can be shared between such AMs are provided and used by heap. table_block_parallelscan_{estimate, intiialize, reinitialize} as callbacks, and table_block_parallelscan_{nextpage, init} for use in AMs. These operate on a ParallelBlockTableScanDesc. 3) Index scans need to be able to access tables to return a tuple, and there needs to be state across individual accesses to the heap to store state like buffers. That's now handled by introducing a sort-of-scan IndexFetchTable, which again is intended to be subclassed by individual AMs (for heap IndexFetchHeap). The relevant callbacks for an AM are index_fetch_{end, begin, reset} to create the necessary state, and index_fetch_tuple to retrieve an indexed tuple. Note that index_fetch_tuple implementations need to be smarter than just blindly fetching the tuples for AMs that have optimizations similar to heap's HOT - the currently alive tuple in the update chain needs to be fetched if appropriate. Similar to table_scan_getnextslot(), it's undesirable to continue to return HeapTuples. Thus index_fetch_heap (might want to rename that later) now accepts a slot as an argument. Core code doesn't have a lot of call sites performing index scans without going through the systable_* API (in contrast to loads of heap_getnext calls and working directly with HeapTuples). Index scans now store the result of a search in IndexScanDesc->xs_heaptid, rather than xs_ctup->t_self. As the target is not generally a HeapTuple anymore that seems cleaner. To be able to sensible adapt code to use the above, two further callbacks have been introduced: a) slot_callbacks returns a TupleTableSlotOps* suitable for creating slots capable of holding a tuple of the AMs type. table_slot_callbacks() and table_slot_create() are based upon that, but have additional logic to deal with views, foreign tables, etc. While this change could have been done separately, nearly all the call sites that needed to be adapted for the rest of this commit also would have been needed to be adapted for table_slot_callbacks(), making separation not worthwhile. b) tuple_satisfies_snapshot checks whether the tuple in a slot is currently visible according to a snapshot. That's required as a few places now don't have a buffer + HeapTuple around, but a slot (which in heap's case internally has that information). Additionally a few infrastructure changes were needed: I) SysScanDesc, as used by systable_{beginscan, getnext} et al. now internally uses a slot to keep track of tuples. While systable_getnext() still returns HeapTuples, and will so for the foreseeable future, the index API (see 1) above) now only deals with slots. The remainder, and largest part, of this commit is then adjusting all scans in postgres to use the new APIs. Author: Andres Freund, Haribabu Kommi, Alvaro Herrera Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180703070645.wchpu5muyto5n647@alap3.anarazel.de https://postgr.es/m/20160812231527.GA690404@alvherre.pgsql
2019-03-11 20:46:41 +01:00
#include "access/tableam.h"
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
#include "access/tsmapi.h"
#include "common/pg_prng.h"
#include "executor/executor.h"
#include "executor/nodeSamplescan.h"
#include "miscadmin.h"
#include "pgstat.h"
#include "storage/bufmgr.h"
#include "storage/predicate.h"
#include "utils/builtins.h"
#include "utils/rel.h"
static TupleTableSlot *SampleNext(SampleScanState *node);
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
static void tablesample_init(SampleScanState *scanstate);
static TupleTableSlot *tablesample_getnext(SampleScanState *scanstate);
/* ----------------------------------------------------------------
* Scan Support
* ----------------------------------------------------------------
*/
/* ----------------------------------------------------------------
* SampleNext
*
* This is a workhorse for ExecSampleScan
* ----------------------------------------------------------------
*/
static TupleTableSlot *
SampleNext(SampleScanState *node)
{
/*
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
* if this is first call within a scan, initialize
*/
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
if (!node->begun)
tablesample_init(node);
/*
* get the next tuple, and store it in our result slot
*/
return tablesample_getnext(node);
}
/*
* SampleRecheck -- access method routine to recheck a tuple in EvalPlanQual
*/
static bool
SampleRecheck(SampleScanState *node, TupleTableSlot *slot)
{
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
/*
* No need to recheck for SampleScan, since like SeqScan we don't pass any
* checkable keys to heap_beginscan.
*/
return true;
}
/* ----------------------------------------------------------------
* ExecSampleScan(node)
*
* Scans the relation using the sampling method and returns
* the next qualifying tuple.
* We call the ExecScan() routine and pass it the appropriate
* access method functions.
* ----------------------------------------------------------------
*/
static TupleTableSlot *
ExecSampleScan(PlanState *pstate)
{
SampleScanState *node = castNode(SampleScanState, pstate);
return ExecScan(&node->ss,
(ExecScanAccessMtd) SampleNext,
(ExecScanRecheckMtd) SampleRecheck);
}
/* ----------------------------------------------------------------
* ExecInitSampleScan
* ----------------------------------------------------------------
*/
SampleScanState *
ExecInitSampleScan(SampleScan *node, EState *estate, int eflags)
{
SampleScanState *scanstate;
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
TableSampleClause *tsc = node->tablesample;
TsmRoutine *tsm;
Assert(outerPlan(node) == NULL);
Assert(innerPlan(node) == NULL);
/*
* create state structure
*/
scanstate = makeNode(SampleScanState);
scanstate->ss.ps.plan = (Plan *) node;
scanstate->ss.ps.state = estate;
scanstate->ss.ps.ExecProcNode = ExecSampleScan;
/*
* Miscellaneous initialization
*
* create expression context for node
*/
ExecAssignExprContext(estate, &scanstate->ss.ps);
/*
* open the scan relation
*/
scanstate->ss.ss_currentRelation =
ExecOpenScanRelation(estate,
node->scan.scanrelid,
eflags);
Faster expression evaluation and targetlist projection. This replaces the old, recursive tree-walk based evaluation, with non-recursive, opcode dispatch based, expression evaluation. Projection is now implemented as part of expression evaluation. This both leads to significant performance improvements, and makes future just-in-time compilation of expressions easier. The speed gains primarily come from: - non-recursive implementation reduces stack usage / overhead - simple sub-expressions are implemented with a single jump, without function calls - sharing some state between different sub-expressions - reduced amount of indirect/hard to predict memory accesses by laying out operation metadata sequentially; including the avoidance of nearly all of the previously used linked lists - more code has been moved to expression initialization, avoiding constant re-checks at evaluation time Future just-in-time compilation (JIT) has become easier, as demonstrated by released patches intended to be merged in a later release, for primarily two reasons: Firstly, due to a stricter split between expression initialization and evaluation, less code has to be handled by the JIT. Secondly, due to the non-recursive nature of the generated "instructions", less performance-critical code-paths can easily be shared between interpreted and compiled evaluation. The new framework allows for significant future optimizations. E.g.: - basic infrastructure for to later reduce the per executor-startup overhead of expression evaluation, by caching state in prepared statements. That'd be helpful in OLTPish scenarios where initialization overhead is measurable. - optimizing the generated "code". A number of proposals for potential work has already been made. - optimizing the interpreter. Similarly a number of proposals have been made here too. The move of logic into the expression initialization step leads to some backward-incompatible changes: - Function permission checks are now done during expression initialization, whereas previously they were done during execution. In edge cases this can lead to errors being raised that previously wouldn't have been, e.g. a NULL array being coerced to a different array type previously didn't perform checks. - The set of domain constraints to be checked, is now evaluated once during expression initialization, previously it was re-built every time a domain check was evaluated. For normal queries this doesn't change much, but e.g. for plpgsql functions, which caches ExprStates, the old set could stick around longer. The behavior around might still change. Author: Andres Freund, with significant changes by Tom Lane, changes by Heikki Linnakangas Reviewed-By: Tom Lane, Heikki Linnakangas Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20161206034955.bh33paeralxbtluv@alap3.anarazel.de
2017-03-14 23:45:36 +01:00
/* we won't set up the HeapScanDesc till later */
scanstate->ss.ss_currentScanDesc = NULL;
/* and create slot with appropriate rowtype */
ExecInitScanTupleSlot(estate, &scanstate->ss,
Introduce notion of different types of slots (without implementing them). Upcoming work intends to allow pluggable ways to introduce new ways of storing table data. Accessing those table access methods from the executor requires TupleTableSlots to be carry tuples in the native format of such storage methods; otherwise there'll be a significant conversion overhead. Different access methods will require different data to store tuples efficiently (just like virtual, minimal, heap already require fields in TupleTableSlot). To allow that without requiring additional pointer indirections, we want to have different structs (embedding TupleTableSlot) for different types of slots. Thus different types of slots are needed, which requires adapting creators of slots. The slot that most efficiently can represent a type of tuple in an executor node will often depend on the type of slot a child node uses. Therefore we need to track the type of slot is returned by nodes, so parent slots can create slots based on that. Relatedly, JIT compilation of tuple deforming needs to know which type of slot a certain expression refers to, so it can create an appropriate deforming function for the type of tuple in the slot. But not all nodes will only return one type of slot, e.g. an append node will potentially return different types of slots for each of its subplans. Therefore add function that allows to query the type of a node's result slot, and whether it'll always be the same type (whether it's fixed). This can be queried using ExecGetResultSlotOps(). The scan, result, inner, outer type of slots are automatically inferred from ExecInitScanTupleSlot(), ExecInitResultSlot(), left/right subtrees respectively. If that's not correct for a node, that can be overwritten using new fields in PlanState. This commit does not introduce the actually abstracted implementation of different kind of TupleTableSlots, that will be left for a followup commit. The different types of slots introduced will, for now, still use the same backing implementation. While this already partially invalidates the big comment in tuptable.h, it seems to make more sense to update it later, when the different TupleTableSlot implementations actually exist. Author: Ashutosh Bapat and Andres Freund, with changes by Amit Khandekar Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181105210039.hh4vvi4vwoq5ba2q@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-11-16 07:00:30 +01:00
RelationGetDescr(scanstate->ss.ss_currentRelation),
tableam: Add and use scan APIs. Too allow table accesses to be not directly dependent on heap, several new abstractions are needed. Specifically: 1) Heap scans need to be generalized into table scans. Do this by introducing TableScanDesc, which will be the "base class" for individual AMs. This contains the AM independent fields from HeapScanDesc. The previous heap_{beginscan,rescan,endscan} et al. have been replaced with a table_ version. There's no direct replacement for heap_getnext(), as that returned a HeapTuple, which is undesirable for a other AMs. Instead there's table_scan_getnextslot(). But note that heap_getnext() lives on, it's still used widely to access catalog tables. This is achieved by new scan_begin, scan_end, scan_rescan, scan_getnextslot callbacks. 2) The portion of parallel scans that's shared between backends need to be able to do so without the user doing per-AM work. To achieve that new parallelscan_{estimate, initialize, reinitialize} callbacks are introduced, which operate on a new ParallelTableScanDesc, which again can be subclassed by AMs. As it is likely that several AMs are going to be block oriented, block oriented callbacks that can be shared between such AMs are provided and used by heap. table_block_parallelscan_{estimate, intiialize, reinitialize} as callbacks, and table_block_parallelscan_{nextpage, init} for use in AMs. These operate on a ParallelBlockTableScanDesc. 3) Index scans need to be able to access tables to return a tuple, and there needs to be state across individual accesses to the heap to store state like buffers. That's now handled by introducing a sort-of-scan IndexFetchTable, which again is intended to be subclassed by individual AMs (for heap IndexFetchHeap). The relevant callbacks for an AM are index_fetch_{end, begin, reset} to create the necessary state, and index_fetch_tuple to retrieve an indexed tuple. Note that index_fetch_tuple implementations need to be smarter than just blindly fetching the tuples for AMs that have optimizations similar to heap's HOT - the currently alive tuple in the update chain needs to be fetched if appropriate. Similar to table_scan_getnextslot(), it's undesirable to continue to return HeapTuples. Thus index_fetch_heap (might want to rename that later) now accepts a slot as an argument. Core code doesn't have a lot of call sites performing index scans without going through the systable_* API (in contrast to loads of heap_getnext calls and working directly with HeapTuples). Index scans now store the result of a search in IndexScanDesc->xs_heaptid, rather than xs_ctup->t_self. As the target is not generally a HeapTuple anymore that seems cleaner. To be able to sensible adapt code to use the above, two further callbacks have been introduced: a) slot_callbacks returns a TupleTableSlotOps* suitable for creating slots capable of holding a tuple of the AMs type. table_slot_callbacks() and table_slot_create() are based upon that, but have additional logic to deal with views, foreign tables, etc. While this change could have been done separately, nearly all the call sites that needed to be adapted for the rest of this commit also would have been needed to be adapted for table_slot_callbacks(), making separation not worthwhile. b) tuple_satisfies_snapshot checks whether the tuple in a slot is currently visible according to a snapshot. That's required as a few places now don't have a buffer + HeapTuple around, but a slot (which in heap's case internally has that information). Additionally a few infrastructure changes were needed: I) SysScanDesc, as used by systable_{beginscan, getnext} et al. now internally uses a slot to keep track of tuples. While systable_getnext() still returns HeapTuples, and will so for the foreseeable future, the index API (see 1) above) now only deals with slots. The remainder, and largest part, of this commit is then adjusting all scans in postgres to use the new APIs. Author: Andres Freund, Haribabu Kommi, Alvaro Herrera Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180703070645.wchpu5muyto5n647@alap3.anarazel.de https://postgr.es/m/20160812231527.GA690404@alvherre.pgsql
2019-03-11 20:46:41 +01:00
table_slot_callbacks(scanstate->ss.ss_currentRelation));
/*
Don't require return slots for nodes without projection. In a lot of nodes the return slot is not required. That can either be because the node doesn't do any projection (say an Append node), or because the node does perform projections but the projection is optimized away because the projection would yield an identical row. Slots aren't that small, especially for wide rows, so it's worthwhile to avoid creating them. It's not possible to just skip creating the slot - it's currently used to determine the tuple descriptor returned by ExecGetResultType(). So separate the determination of the result type from the slot creation. The work previously done internally ExecInitResultTupleSlotTL() can now also be done separately with ExecInitResultTypeTL() and ExecInitResultSlot(). That way nodes that aren't guaranteed to need a result slot, can use ExecInitResultTypeTL() to determine the result type of the node, and ExecAssignScanProjectionInfo() (via ExecConditionalAssignProjectionInfo()) determines that a result slot is needed, it is created with ExecInitResultSlot(). Besides the advantage of avoiding to create slots that then are unused, this is necessary preparation for later patches around tuple table slot abstraction. In particular separating the return descriptor and slot is a prerequisite to allow JITing of tuple deforming with knowledge of the underlying tuple format, and to avoid unnecessarily creating JITed tuple deforming for virtual slots. This commit removes a redundant argument from ExecInitResultTupleSlotTL(). While this commit touches a lot of the relevant lines anyway, it'd normally still not worthwhile to cause breakage, except that aforementioned later commits will touch *all* ExecInitResultTupleSlotTL() callers anyway (but fits worse thematically). Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181105210039.hh4vvi4vwoq5ba2q@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-11-10 02:19:39 +01:00
* Initialize result type and projection.
*/
Don't require return slots for nodes without projection. In a lot of nodes the return slot is not required. That can either be because the node doesn't do any projection (say an Append node), or because the node does perform projections but the projection is optimized away because the projection would yield an identical row. Slots aren't that small, especially for wide rows, so it's worthwhile to avoid creating them. It's not possible to just skip creating the slot - it's currently used to determine the tuple descriptor returned by ExecGetResultType(). So separate the determination of the result type from the slot creation. The work previously done internally ExecInitResultTupleSlotTL() can now also be done separately with ExecInitResultTypeTL() and ExecInitResultSlot(). That way nodes that aren't guaranteed to need a result slot, can use ExecInitResultTypeTL() to determine the result type of the node, and ExecAssignScanProjectionInfo() (via ExecConditionalAssignProjectionInfo()) determines that a result slot is needed, it is created with ExecInitResultSlot(). Besides the advantage of avoiding to create slots that then are unused, this is necessary preparation for later patches around tuple table slot abstraction. In particular separating the return descriptor and slot is a prerequisite to allow JITing of tuple deforming with knowledge of the underlying tuple format, and to avoid unnecessarily creating JITed tuple deforming for virtual slots. This commit removes a redundant argument from ExecInitResultTupleSlotTL(). While this commit touches a lot of the relevant lines anyway, it'd normally still not worthwhile to cause breakage, except that aforementioned later commits will touch *all* ExecInitResultTupleSlotTL() callers anyway (but fits worse thematically). Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181105210039.hh4vvi4vwoq5ba2q@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-11-10 02:19:39 +01:00
ExecInitResultTypeTL(&scanstate->ss.ps);
ExecAssignScanProjectionInfo(&scanstate->ss);
/*
* initialize child expressions
*/
scanstate->ss.ps.qual =
ExecInitQual(node->scan.plan.qual, (PlanState *) scanstate);
scanstate->args = ExecInitExprList(tsc->args, (PlanState *) scanstate);
scanstate->repeatable =
ExecInitExpr(tsc->repeatable, (PlanState *) scanstate);
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
/*
* If we don't have a REPEATABLE clause, select a random seed. We want to
* do this just once, since the seed shouldn't change over rescans.
*/
if (tsc->repeatable == NULL)
scanstate->seed = pg_prng_uint32(&pg_global_prng_state);
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
/*
* Finally, initialize the TABLESAMPLE method handler.
*/
tsm = GetTsmRoutine(tsc->tsmhandler);
scanstate->tsmroutine = tsm;
scanstate->tsm_state = NULL;
if (tsm->InitSampleScan)
tsm->InitSampleScan(scanstate, eflags);
/* We'll do BeginSampleScan later; we can't evaluate params yet */
scanstate->begun = false;
return scanstate;
}
/* ----------------------------------------------------------------
* ExecEndSampleScan
*
* frees any storage allocated through C routines.
* ----------------------------------------------------------------
*/
void
ExecEndSampleScan(SampleScanState *node)
{
/*
* Tell sampling function that we finished the scan.
*/
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
if (node->tsmroutine->EndSampleScan)
node->tsmroutine->EndSampleScan(node);
/*
* Free the exprcontext
*/
ExecFreeExprContext(&node->ss.ps);
/*
* clean out the tuple table
*/
Don't require return slots for nodes without projection. In a lot of nodes the return slot is not required. That can either be because the node doesn't do any projection (say an Append node), or because the node does perform projections but the projection is optimized away because the projection would yield an identical row. Slots aren't that small, especially for wide rows, so it's worthwhile to avoid creating them. It's not possible to just skip creating the slot - it's currently used to determine the tuple descriptor returned by ExecGetResultType(). So separate the determination of the result type from the slot creation. The work previously done internally ExecInitResultTupleSlotTL() can now also be done separately with ExecInitResultTypeTL() and ExecInitResultSlot(). That way nodes that aren't guaranteed to need a result slot, can use ExecInitResultTypeTL() to determine the result type of the node, and ExecAssignScanProjectionInfo() (via ExecConditionalAssignProjectionInfo()) determines that a result slot is needed, it is created with ExecInitResultSlot(). Besides the advantage of avoiding to create slots that then are unused, this is necessary preparation for later patches around tuple table slot abstraction. In particular separating the return descriptor and slot is a prerequisite to allow JITing of tuple deforming with knowledge of the underlying tuple format, and to avoid unnecessarily creating JITed tuple deforming for virtual slots. This commit removes a redundant argument from ExecInitResultTupleSlotTL(). While this commit touches a lot of the relevant lines anyway, it'd normally still not worthwhile to cause breakage, except that aforementioned later commits will touch *all* ExecInitResultTupleSlotTL() callers anyway (but fits worse thematically). Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181105210039.hh4vvi4vwoq5ba2q@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-11-10 02:19:39 +01:00
if (node->ss.ps.ps_ResultTupleSlot)
ExecClearTuple(node->ss.ps.ps_ResultTupleSlot);
ExecClearTuple(node->ss.ss_ScanTupleSlot);
/*
* close heap scan
*/
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
if (node->ss.ss_currentScanDesc)
tableam: Add and use scan APIs. Too allow table accesses to be not directly dependent on heap, several new abstractions are needed. Specifically: 1) Heap scans need to be generalized into table scans. Do this by introducing TableScanDesc, which will be the "base class" for individual AMs. This contains the AM independent fields from HeapScanDesc. The previous heap_{beginscan,rescan,endscan} et al. have been replaced with a table_ version. There's no direct replacement for heap_getnext(), as that returned a HeapTuple, which is undesirable for a other AMs. Instead there's table_scan_getnextslot(). But note that heap_getnext() lives on, it's still used widely to access catalog tables. This is achieved by new scan_begin, scan_end, scan_rescan, scan_getnextslot callbacks. 2) The portion of parallel scans that's shared between backends need to be able to do so without the user doing per-AM work. To achieve that new parallelscan_{estimate, initialize, reinitialize} callbacks are introduced, which operate on a new ParallelTableScanDesc, which again can be subclassed by AMs. As it is likely that several AMs are going to be block oriented, block oriented callbacks that can be shared between such AMs are provided and used by heap. table_block_parallelscan_{estimate, intiialize, reinitialize} as callbacks, and table_block_parallelscan_{nextpage, init} for use in AMs. These operate on a ParallelBlockTableScanDesc. 3) Index scans need to be able to access tables to return a tuple, and there needs to be state across individual accesses to the heap to store state like buffers. That's now handled by introducing a sort-of-scan IndexFetchTable, which again is intended to be subclassed by individual AMs (for heap IndexFetchHeap). The relevant callbacks for an AM are index_fetch_{end, begin, reset} to create the necessary state, and index_fetch_tuple to retrieve an indexed tuple. Note that index_fetch_tuple implementations need to be smarter than just blindly fetching the tuples for AMs that have optimizations similar to heap's HOT - the currently alive tuple in the update chain needs to be fetched if appropriate. Similar to table_scan_getnextslot(), it's undesirable to continue to return HeapTuples. Thus index_fetch_heap (might want to rename that later) now accepts a slot as an argument. Core code doesn't have a lot of call sites performing index scans without going through the systable_* API (in contrast to loads of heap_getnext calls and working directly with HeapTuples). Index scans now store the result of a search in IndexScanDesc->xs_heaptid, rather than xs_ctup->t_self. As the target is not generally a HeapTuple anymore that seems cleaner. To be able to sensible adapt code to use the above, two further callbacks have been introduced: a) slot_callbacks returns a TupleTableSlotOps* suitable for creating slots capable of holding a tuple of the AMs type. table_slot_callbacks() and table_slot_create() are based upon that, but have additional logic to deal with views, foreign tables, etc. While this change could have been done separately, nearly all the call sites that needed to be adapted for the rest of this commit also would have been needed to be adapted for table_slot_callbacks(), making separation not worthwhile. b) tuple_satisfies_snapshot checks whether the tuple in a slot is currently visible according to a snapshot. That's required as a few places now don't have a buffer + HeapTuple around, but a slot (which in heap's case internally has that information). Additionally a few infrastructure changes were needed: I) SysScanDesc, as used by systable_{beginscan, getnext} et al. now internally uses a slot to keep track of tuples. While systable_getnext() still returns HeapTuples, and will so for the foreseeable future, the index API (see 1) above) now only deals with slots. The remainder, and largest part, of this commit is then adjusting all scans in postgres to use the new APIs. Author: Andres Freund, Haribabu Kommi, Alvaro Herrera Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180703070645.wchpu5muyto5n647@alap3.anarazel.de https://postgr.es/m/20160812231527.GA690404@alvherre.pgsql
2019-03-11 20:46:41 +01:00
table_endscan(node->ss.ss_currentScanDesc);
}
/* ----------------------------------------------------------------
* ExecReScanSampleScan
*
* Rescans the relation.
*
* ----------------------------------------------------------------
*/
void
ExecReScanSampleScan(SampleScanState *node)
{
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
/* Remember we need to do BeginSampleScan again (if we did it at all) */
node->begun = false;
node->done = false;
node->haveblock = false;
node->donetuples = 0;
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
ExecScanReScan(&node->ss);
}
/*
* Initialize the TABLESAMPLE method: evaluate params and call BeginSampleScan.
*/
static void
tablesample_init(SampleScanState *scanstate)
{
TsmRoutine *tsm = scanstate->tsmroutine;
ExprContext *econtext = scanstate->ss.ps.ps_ExprContext;
Datum *params;
Datum datum;
bool isnull;
uint32 seed;
bool allow_sync;
int i;
ListCell *arg;
scanstate->donetuples = 0;
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
params = (Datum *) palloc(list_length(scanstate->args) * sizeof(Datum));
i = 0;
foreach(arg, scanstate->args)
{
ExprState *argstate = (ExprState *) lfirst(arg);
params[i] = ExecEvalExprSwitchContext(argstate,
econtext,
&isnull);
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
if (isnull)
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_TABLESAMPLE_ARGUMENT),
errmsg("TABLESAMPLE parameter cannot be null")));
i++;
}
if (scanstate->repeatable)
{
datum = ExecEvalExprSwitchContext(scanstate->repeatable,
econtext,
&isnull);
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
if (isnull)
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_TABLESAMPLE_REPEAT),
errmsg("TABLESAMPLE REPEATABLE parameter cannot be null")));
/*
* The REPEATABLE parameter has been coerced to float8 by the parser.
* The reason for using float8 at the SQL level is that it will
* produce unsurprising results both for users used to databases that
* accept only integers in the REPEATABLE clause and for those who
* might expect that REPEATABLE works like setseed() (a float in the
* range from -1 to 1).
*
* We use hashfloat8() to convert the supplied value into a suitable
* seed. For regression-testing purposes, that has the convenient
* property that REPEATABLE(0) gives a machine-independent result.
*/
seed = DatumGetUInt32(DirectFunctionCall1(hashfloat8, datum));
}
else
{
/* Use the seed selected by ExecInitSampleScan */
seed = scanstate->seed;
}
/* Set default values for params that BeginSampleScan can adjust */
scanstate->use_bulkread = true;
scanstate->use_pagemode = true;
/* Let tablesample method do its thing */
tsm->BeginSampleScan(scanstate,
params,
list_length(scanstate->args),
seed);
/* We'll use syncscan if there's no NextSampleBlock function */
allow_sync = (tsm->NextSampleBlock == NULL);
/* Now we can create or reset the HeapScanDesc */
if (scanstate->ss.ss_currentScanDesc == NULL)
{
scanstate->ss.ss_currentScanDesc =
tableam: Add and use scan APIs. Too allow table accesses to be not directly dependent on heap, several new abstractions are needed. Specifically: 1) Heap scans need to be generalized into table scans. Do this by introducing TableScanDesc, which will be the "base class" for individual AMs. This contains the AM independent fields from HeapScanDesc. The previous heap_{beginscan,rescan,endscan} et al. have been replaced with a table_ version. There's no direct replacement for heap_getnext(), as that returned a HeapTuple, which is undesirable for a other AMs. Instead there's table_scan_getnextslot(). But note that heap_getnext() lives on, it's still used widely to access catalog tables. This is achieved by new scan_begin, scan_end, scan_rescan, scan_getnextslot callbacks. 2) The portion of parallel scans that's shared between backends need to be able to do so without the user doing per-AM work. To achieve that new parallelscan_{estimate, initialize, reinitialize} callbacks are introduced, which operate on a new ParallelTableScanDesc, which again can be subclassed by AMs. As it is likely that several AMs are going to be block oriented, block oriented callbacks that can be shared between such AMs are provided and used by heap. table_block_parallelscan_{estimate, intiialize, reinitialize} as callbacks, and table_block_parallelscan_{nextpage, init} for use in AMs. These operate on a ParallelBlockTableScanDesc. 3) Index scans need to be able to access tables to return a tuple, and there needs to be state across individual accesses to the heap to store state like buffers. That's now handled by introducing a sort-of-scan IndexFetchTable, which again is intended to be subclassed by individual AMs (for heap IndexFetchHeap). The relevant callbacks for an AM are index_fetch_{end, begin, reset} to create the necessary state, and index_fetch_tuple to retrieve an indexed tuple. Note that index_fetch_tuple implementations need to be smarter than just blindly fetching the tuples for AMs that have optimizations similar to heap's HOT - the currently alive tuple in the update chain needs to be fetched if appropriate. Similar to table_scan_getnextslot(), it's undesirable to continue to return HeapTuples. Thus index_fetch_heap (might want to rename that later) now accepts a slot as an argument. Core code doesn't have a lot of call sites performing index scans without going through the systable_* API (in contrast to loads of heap_getnext calls and working directly with HeapTuples). Index scans now store the result of a search in IndexScanDesc->xs_heaptid, rather than xs_ctup->t_self. As the target is not generally a HeapTuple anymore that seems cleaner. To be able to sensible adapt code to use the above, two further callbacks have been introduced: a) slot_callbacks returns a TupleTableSlotOps* suitable for creating slots capable of holding a tuple of the AMs type. table_slot_callbacks() and table_slot_create() are based upon that, but have additional logic to deal with views, foreign tables, etc. While this change could have been done separately, nearly all the call sites that needed to be adapted for the rest of this commit also would have been needed to be adapted for table_slot_callbacks(), making separation not worthwhile. b) tuple_satisfies_snapshot checks whether the tuple in a slot is currently visible according to a snapshot. That's required as a few places now don't have a buffer + HeapTuple around, but a slot (which in heap's case internally has that information). Additionally a few infrastructure changes were needed: I) SysScanDesc, as used by systable_{beginscan, getnext} et al. now internally uses a slot to keep track of tuples. While systable_getnext() still returns HeapTuples, and will so for the foreseeable future, the index API (see 1) above) now only deals with slots. The remainder, and largest part, of this commit is then adjusting all scans in postgres to use the new APIs. Author: Andres Freund, Haribabu Kommi, Alvaro Herrera Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180703070645.wchpu5muyto5n647@alap3.anarazel.de https://postgr.es/m/20160812231527.GA690404@alvherre.pgsql
2019-03-11 20:46:41 +01:00
table_beginscan_sampling(scanstate->ss.ss_currentRelation,
scanstate->ss.ps.state->es_snapshot,
0, NULL,
scanstate->use_bulkread,
allow_sync,
scanstate->use_pagemode);
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
}
else
{
tableam: Add and use scan APIs. Too allow table accesses to be not directly dependent on heap, several new abstractions are needed. Specifically: 1) Heap scans need to be generalized into table scans. Do this by introducing TableScanDesc, which will be the "base class" for individual AMs. This contains the AM independent fields from HeapScanDesc. The previous heap_{beginscan,rescan,endscan} et al. have been replaced with a table_ version. There's no direct replacement for heap_getnext(), as that returned a HeapTuple, which is undesirable for a other AMs. Instead there's table_scan_getnextslot(). But note that heap_getnext() lives on, it's still used widely to access catalog tables. This is achieved by new scan_begin, scan_end, scan_rescan, scan_getnextslot callbacks. 2) The portion of parallel scans that's shared between backends need to be able to do so without the user doing per-AM work. To achieve that new parallelscan_{estimate, initialize, reinitialize} callbacks are introduced, which operate on a new ParallelTableScanDesc, which again can be subclassed by AMs. As it is likely that several AMs are going to be block oriented, block oriented callbacks that can be shared between such AMs are provided and used by heap. table_block_parallelscan_{estimate, intiialize, reinitialize} as callbacks, and table_block_parallelscan_{nextpage, init} for use in AMs. These operate on a ParallelBlockTableScanDesc. 3) Index scans need to be able to access tables to return a tuple, and there needs to be state across individual accesses to the heap to store state like buffers. That's now handled by introducing a sort-of-scan IndexFetchTable, which again is intended to be subclassed by individual AMs (for heap IndexFetchHeap). The relevant callbacks for an AM are index_fetch_{end, begin, reset} to create the necessary state, and index_fetch_tuple to retrieve an indexed tuple. Note that index_fetch_tuple implementations need to be smarter than just blindly fetching the tuples for AMs that have optimizations similar to heap's HOT - the currently alive tuple in the update chain needs to be fetched if appropriate. Similar to table_scan_getnextslot(), it's undesirable to continue to return HeapTuples. Thus index_fetch_heap (might want to rename that later) now accepts a slot as an argument. Core code doesn't have a lot of call sites performing index scans without going through the systable_* API (in contrast to loads of heap_getnext calls and working directly with HeapTuples). Index scans now store the result of a search in IndexScanDesc->xs_heaptid, rather than xs_ctup->t_self. As the target is not generally a HeapTuple anymore that seems cleaner. To be able to sensible adapt code to use the above, two further callbacks have been introduced: a) slot_callbacks returns a TupleTableSlotOps* suitable for creating slots capable of holding a tuple of the AMs type. table_slot_callbacks() and table_slot_create() are based upon that, but have additional logic to deal with views, foreign tables, etc. While this change could have been done separately, nearly all the call sites that needed to be adapted for the rest of this commit also would have been needed to be adapted for table_slot_callbacks(), making separation not worthwhile. b) tuple_satisfies_snapshot checks whether the tuple in a slot is currently visible according to a snapshot. That's required as a few places now don't have a buffer + HeapTuple around, but a slot (which in heap's case internally has that information). Additionally a few infrastructure changes were needed: I) SysScanDesc, as used by systable_{beginscan, getnext} et al. now internally uses a slot to keep track of tuples. While systable_getnext() still returns HeapTuples, and will so for the foreseeable future, the index API (see 1) above) now only deals with slots. The remainder, and largest part, of this commit is then adjusting all scans in postgres to use the new APIs. Author: Andres Freund, Haribabu Kommi, Alvaro Herrera Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180703070645.wchpu5muyto5n647@alap3.anarazel.de https://postgr.es/m/20160812231527.GA690404@alvherre.pgsql
2019-03-11 20:46:41 +01:00
table_rescan_set_params(scanstate->ss.ss_currentScanDesc, NULL,
scanstate->use_bulkread,
allow_sync,
scanstate->use_pagemode);
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
}
pfree(params);
/* And we're initialized. */
scanstate->begun = true;
}
/*
* Get next tuple from TABLESAMPLE method.
*/
static TupleTableSlot *
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
tablesample_getnext(SampleScanState *scanstate)
{
tableam: Add and use scan APIs. Too allow table accesses to be not directly dependent on heap, several new abstractions are needed. Specifically: 1) Heap scans need to be generalized into table scans. Do this by introducing TableScanDesc, which will be the "base class" for individual AMs. This contains the AM independent fields from HeapScanDesc. The previous heap_{beginscan,rescan,endscan} et al. have been replaced with a table_ version. There's no direct replacement for heap_getnext(), as that returned a HeapTuple, which is undesirable for a other AMs. Instead there's table_scan_getnextslot(). But note that heap_getnext() lives on, it's still used widely to access catalog tables. This is achieved by new scan_begin, scan_end, scan_rescan, scan_getnextslot callbacks. 2) The portion of parallel scans that's shared between backends need to be able to do so without the user doing per-AM work. To achieve that new parallelscan_{estimate, initialize, reinitialize} callbacks are introduced, which operate on a new ParallelTableScanDesc, which again can be subclassed by AMs. As it is likely that several AMs are going to be block oriented, block oriented callbacks that can be shared between such AMs are provided and used by heap. table_block_parallelscan_{estimate, intiialize, reinitialize} as callbacks, and table_block_parallelscan_{nextpage, init} for use in AMs. These operate on a ParallelBlockTableScanDesc. 3) Index scans need to be able to access tables to return a tuple, and there needs to be state across individual accesses to the heap to store state like buffers. That's now handled by introducing a sort-of-scan IndexFetchTable, which again is intended to be subclassed by individual AMs (for heap IndexFetchHeap). The relevant callbacks for an AM are index_fetch_{end, begin, reset} to create the necessary state, and index_fetch_tuple to retrieve an indexed tuple. Note that index_fetch_tuple implementations need to be smarter than just blindly fetching the tuples for AMs that have optimizations similar to heap's HOT - the currently alive tuple in the update chain needs to be fetched if appropriate. Similar to table_scan_getnextslot(), it's undesirable to continue to return HeapTuples. Thus index_fetch_heap (might want to rename that later) now accepts a slot as an argument. Core code doesn't have a lot of call sites performing index scans without going through the systable_* API (in contrast to loads of heap_getnext calls and working directly with HeapTuples). Index scans now store the result of a search in IndexScanDesc->xs_heaptid, rather than xs_ctup->t_self. As the target is not generally a HeapTuple anymore that seems cleaner. To be able to sensible adapt code to use the above, two further callbacks have been introduced: a) slot_callbacks returns a TupleTableSlotOps* suitable for creating slots capable of holding a tuple of the AMs type. table_slot_callbacks() and table_slot_create() are based upon that, but have additional logic to deal with views, foreign tables, etc. While this change could have been done separately, nearly all the call sites that needed to be adapted for the rest of this commit also would have been needed to be adapted for table_slot_callbacks(), making separation not worthwhile. b) tuple_satisfies_snapshot checks whether the tuple in a slot is currently visible according to a snapshot. That's required as a few places now don't have a buffer + HeapTuple around, but a slot (which in heap's case internally has that information). Additionally a few infrastructure changes were needed: I) SysScanDesc, as used by systable_{beginscan, getnext} et al. now internally uses a slot to keep track of tuples. While systable_getnext() still returns HeapTuples, and will so for the foreseeable future, the index API (see 1) above) now only deals with slots. The remainder, and largest part, of this commit is then adjusting all scans in postgres to use the new APIs. Author: Andres Freund, Haribabu Kommi, Alvaro Herrera Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180703070645.wchpu5muyto5n647@alap3.anarazel.de https://postgr.es/m/20160812231527.GA690404@alvherre.pgsql
2019-03-11 20:46:41 +01:00
TableScanDesc scan = scanstate->ss.ss_currentScanDesc;
TupleTableSlot *slot = scanstate->ss.ss_ScanTupleSlot;
ExecClearTuple(slot);
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
if (scanstate->done)
return NULL;
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
for (;;)
{
if (!scanstate->haveblock)
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
{
if (!table_scan_sample_next_block(scan, scanstate))
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
{
scanstate->haveblock = false;
scanstate->done = true;
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
/* exhausted relation */
return NULL;
}
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
scanstate->haveblock = true;
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
}
if (!table_scan_sample_next_tuple(scan, scanstate, slot))
{
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
/*
* If we get here, it means we've exhausted the items on this page
* and it's time to move to the next.
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
*/
scanstate->haveblock = false;
continue;
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
}
/* Found visible tuple, return it. */
break;
Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.
2015-07-25 20:39:00 +02:00
}
scanstate->donetuples++;
return slot;
}