rdelaage
/
postgresql
mirror of https://git.postgresql.org/git/postgresql.git
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
postgresql/src/include/executor/execExpr.h

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

860 lines
24 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

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
/*-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*
* execExpr.h
* Low level infrastructure related to expression evaluation
*
*
Update copyright for 2024 Reported-by: Michael Paquier Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/ZZKTDPxBBMt3C0J9@paquier.xyz Backpatch-through: 12
2024-01-04 02:49:05 +01:00
* Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2024, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
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
* Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California
*
* src/include/executor/execExpr.h
*
*-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*/
#ifndef EXEC_EXPR_H
#define EXEC_EXPR_H
Expression evaluation based aggregate transition invocation. Previously aggregate transition and combination functions were invoked by special case code in nodeAgg.c, evaluating input and filters separately using the expression evaluation machinery. That turns out to not be great for performance for several reasons: - repeated expression evaluations have some cost - the transition functions invocations are poorly predicted, as commonly there are multiple aggregates in a query, resulting in the same call-stack invoking different functions. - filter and input computation had to be done separately - the special case code made it hard to implement JITing of the whole transition function invocation Address this by building one large expression that computes input, evaluates filters, and invokes transition functions. This leads to moderate speedups in queries bottlenecked by aggregate computations, and enables large speedups for similar cases once JITing is done. There's potential for further improvement: - It'd be nice if we could simplify the somewhat expensive aggstate->all_pergroups lookups. - right now there's still an advance_transition_function invocation in nodeAgg.c, leading to some code duplication. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170901064131.tazjxwus3k2w3ybh@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-01-09 22:25:38 +01:00
#include "executor/nodeAgg.h"
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
#include "nodes/execnodes.h"
Add soft error handling to some expression nodes This adjusts the code for CoerceViaIO and CoerceToDomain expression nodes to handle errors softly. For CoerceViaIo, this adds a new ExprEvalStep opcode EEOP_IOCOERCE_SAFE, which is implemented in the new accompanying function ExecEvalCoerceViaIOSafe(). The only difference from EEOP_IOCOERCE's inline implementation is that the input function receives an ErrorSaveContext via the function's FunctionCallInfo.context, which it can use to handle errors softly. For CoerceToDomain, this simply entails replacing the ereport() in ExecEvalConstraintNotNull() and ExecEvalConstraintCheck() by errsave() passing it the ErrorSaveContext passed in the expression's ExprEvalStep. In both cases, the ErrorSaveContext to be used is passed by setting ExprState.escontext to point to it before calling ExecInitExprRec() on the expression tree whose errors are to be handled softly. Note that there's no functional change as of this commit as no call site of ExecInitExprRec() has been changed. This is intended for implementing new SQL/JSON expression nodes in future commits. Extracted from a much larger patch to add SQL/JSON query functions. Author: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> Author: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> Author: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> Author: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> Author: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Reviewers have included (in no particular order) Andres Freund, Alexander Korotkov, Pavel Stehule, Andrew Alsup, Erik Rijkers, Zihong Yu, Himanshu Upadhyaya, Daniel Gustafsson, Justin Pryzby, Álvaro Herrera, Jian He, Peter Eisentraut Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd0bb935-0158-78a7-08b5-904886deac4b@postgrespro.ru Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d%40postgresql.org Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqHROpf9e644D8BRqYvaAPmgBZVup-xKMDPk-nd4EpgzHw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqE4XTdfb1nW=Ojoy_tQSRhYt-q_kb6i5d4xcKyrLC1Nbg@mail.gmail.com
2024-01-24 05:35:22 +01:00
#include "nodes/miscnodes.h"
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
Rearrange execution of PARAM_EXTERN Params for plpgsql's benefit. This patch does three interrelated things: * Create a new expression execution step type EEOP_PARAM_CALLBACK and add the infrastructure needed for add-on modules to generate that. As discussed, the best control mechanism for that seems to be to add another hook function to ParamListInfo, which will be called by ExecInitExpr if it's supplied and a PARAM_EXTERN Param is found. For stand-alone expressions, we add a new entry point to allow the ParamListInfo to be specified directly, since it can't be retrieved from the parent plan node's EState. * Redesign the API for the ParamListInfo paramFetch hook so that the ParamExternData array can be entirely virtual. This also lets us get rid of ParamListInfo.paramMask, instead leaving it to the paramFetch hook to decide which param IDs should be accessible or not. plpgsql_param_fetch was already doing the identical masking check, so having callers do it too seemed redundant. While I was at it, I added a "speculative" flag to paramFetch that the planner can specify as TRUE to avoid unwanted failures. This solves an ancient problem for plpgsql that it couldn't provide values of non-DTYPE_VAR variables to the planner for fear of triggering premature "record not assigned yet" or "field not found" errors during planning. * Rework plpgsql to get rid of the need for "unshared" parameter lists, by dint of turning the single ParamListInfo per estate into a nearly read-only data structure that doesn't instantiate any per-variable data. Instead, the paramFetch hook controls access to per-variable data and can make the right decisions on the fly, replacing the cases that we used to need multiple ParamListInfos for. This might perhaps have been a performance loss on its own, but by using a paramCompile hook we can bypass plpgsql_param_fetch entirely during normal query execution. (It's now only called when, eg, we copy the ParamListInfo into a cursor portal. copyParamList() or SerializeParamList() effectively instantiate the virtual parameter array as a simple physical array without a paramFetch hook, which is what we want in those cases.) This allows reverting most of commit 6c82d8d1f, though I kept the cosmetic code-consolidation aspects of that (eg the assign_simple_var function). Performance testing shows this to be at worst a break-even change, and it can provide wins ranging up to 20% in test cases involving accesses to fields of "record" variables. The fact that values of such variables can now be exposed to the planner might produce wins in some situations, too, but I've not pursued that angle. In passing, remove the "parent" pointer from the arguments to ExecInitExprRec and related functions, instead storing that pointer in a transient field in ExprState. The ParamListInfo pointer for a stand-alone expression is handled the same way; we'd otherwise have had to add yet another recursively-passed-down argument in expression compilation. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/32589.1513706441@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-12-21 18:57:41 +01:00
/* forward references to avoid circularity */
struct ExprEvalStep;
Renaming for new subscripting mechanism Over at patch https://commitfest.postgresql.org/21/1062/ Dmitry wants to introduce a more generic subscription mechanism, which allows subscripting not only arrays but also other object types such as JSONB. That functionality is introduced in a largish invasive patch, out of which this internal renaming patch was extracted. Author: Dmitry Dolgov Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcUK4EqPAu7XRRO5CCjMwhz5zvg+rfWuLzVoxp_5sKS6=w@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-01 16:50:32 +01:00
struct SubscriptingRefState;
Speedup ScalarArrayOpExpr evaluation ScalarArrayOpExprs with "useOr=true" and a set of Consts on the righthand side have traditionally been evaluated by using a linear search over the array. When these arrays contain large numbers of elements then this linear search could become a significant part of execution time. Here we add a new method of evaluating ScalarArrayOpExpr expressions to allow them to be evaluated by first building a hash table containing each element, then on subsequent evaluations, we just probe that hash table to determine if there is a match. The planner is in charge of determining when this optimization is possible and it enables it by setting hashfuncid in the ScalarArrayOpExpr. The executor will only perform the hash table evaluation when the hashfuncid is set. This means that not all cases are optimized. For example CHECK constraints containing an IN clause won't go through the planner, so won't get the hashfuncid set. We could maybe do something about that at some later date. The reason we're not doing it now is from fear that we may slow down cases where the expression is evaluated only once. Those cases can be common, for example, a single row INSERT to a table with a CHECK constraint containing an IN clause. In the planner, we enable this when there are suitable hash functions for the ScalarArrayOpExpr's operator and only when there is at least MIN_ARRAY_SIZE_FOR_HASHED_SAOP elements in the array. The threshold is currently set to 9. Author: James Coleman, David Rowley Reviewed-by: David Rowley, Tomas Vondra, Heikki Linnakangas Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAaqYe8x62+=wn0zvNKCj55tPpg-JBHzhZFFc6ANovdqFw7-dA@mail.gmail.com
2021-04-08 13:51:22 +02:00
struct ScalarArrayOpExprHashTable;
SQL/JSON: add standard JSON constructor functions This commit introduces the SQL/JSON standard-conforming constructors for JSON types: JSON_ARRAY() JSON_ARRAYAGG() JSON_OBJECT() JSON_OBJECTAGG() Most of the functionality was already present in PostgreSQL-specific functions, but these include some new functionality such as the ability to skip or include NULL values, and to allow duplicate keys or throw error when they are found, as well as the standard specified syntax to specify output type and format. Author: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> Author: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> Author: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> Author: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Reviewers have included (in no particular order) Andres Freund, Alexander Korotkov, Pavel Stehule, Andrew Alsup, Erik Rijkers, Zihong Yu, Himanshu Upadhyaya, Daniel Gustafsson, Justin Pryzby. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAF4Au4w2x-5LTnN_bxky-mq4=WOqsGsxSpENCzHRAzSnEd8+WQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd0bb935-0158-78a7-08b5-904886deac4b@postgrespro.ru Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d%40postgresql.org
2023-03-29 12:11:36 +02:00
struct JsonConstructorExprState;
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
/* Bits in ExprState->flags (see also execnodes.h for public flag bits): */
/* expression's interpreter has been initialized */
#define EEO_FLAG_INTERPRETER_INITIALIZED (1 << 1)
/* jump-threading is in use */
#define EEO_FLAG_DIRECT_THREADED (1 << 2)
Rearrange execution of PARAM_EXTERN Params for plpgsql's benefit. This patch does three interrelated things: * Create a new expression execution step type EEOP_PARAM_CALLBACK and add the infrastructure needed for add-on modules to generate that. As discussed, the best control mechanism for that seems to be to add another hook function to ParamListInfo, which will be called by ExecInitExpr if it's supplied and a PARAM_EXTERN Param is found. For stand-alone expressions, we add a new entry point to allow the ParamListInfo to be specified directly, since it can't be retrieved from the parent plan node's EState. * Redesign the API for the ParamListInfo paramFetch hook so that the ParamExternData array can be entirely virtual. This also lets us get rid of ParamListInfo.paramMask, instead leaving it to the paramFetch hook to decide which param IDs should be accessible or not. plpgsql_param_fetch was already doing the identical masking check, so having callers do it too seemed redundant. While I was at it, I added a "speculative" flag to paramFetch that the planner can specify as TRUE to avoid unwanted failures. This solves an ancient problem for plpgsql that it couldn't provide values of non-DTYPE_VAR variables to the planner for fear of triggering premature "record not assigned yet" or "field not found" errors during planning. * Rework plpgsql to get rid of the need for "unshared" parameter lists, by dint of turning the single ParamListInfo per estate into a nearly read-only data structure that doesn't instantiate any per-variable data. Instead, the paramFetch hook controls access to per-variable data and can make the right decisions on the fly, replacing the cases that we used to need multiple ParamListInfos for. This might perhaps have been a performance loss on its own, but by using a paramCompile hook we can bypass plpgsql_param_fetch entirely during normal query execution. (It's now only called when, eg, we copy the ParamListInfo into a cursor portal. copyParamList() or SerializeParamList() effectively instantiate the virtual parameter array as a simple physical array without a paramFetch hook, which is what we want in those cases.) This allows reverting most of commit 6c82d8d1f, though I kept the cosmetic code-consolidation aspects of that (eg the assign_simple_var function). Performance testing shows this to be at worst a break-even change, and it can provide wins ranging up to 20% in test cases involving accesses to fields of "record" variables. The fact that values of such variables can now be exposed to the planner might produce wins in some situations, too, but I've not pursued that angle. In passing, remove the "parent" pointer from the arguments to ExecInitExprRec and related functions, instead storing that pointer in a transient field in ExprState. The ParamListInfo pointer for a stand-alone expression is handled the same way; we'd otherwise have had to add yet another recursively-passed-down argument in expression compilation. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/32589.1513706441@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-12-21 18:57:41 +01:00
/* Typical API for out-of-line evaluation subroutines */
typedef void (*ExecEvalSubroutine) (ExprState *state,
struct ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
Support subscripting of arbitrary types, not only arrays. This patch generalizes the subscripting infrastructure so that any data type can be subscripted, if it provides a handler function to define what that means. Traditional variable-length (varlena) arrays all use array_subscript_handler(), while the existing fixed-length types that support subscripting use raw_array_subscript_handler(). It's expected that other types that want to use subscripting notation will define their own handlers. (This patch provides no such new features, though; it only lays the foundation for them.) To do this, move the parser's semantic processing of subscripts (including coercion to whatever data type is required) into a method callback supplied by the handler. On the execution side, replace the ExecEvalSubscriptingRef* layer of functions with direct calls to callback-supplied execution routines. (Thus, essentially no new run-time overhead should be caused by this patch. Indeed, there is room to remove some overhead by supplying specialized execution routines. This patch does a little bit in that line, but more could be done.) Additional work is required here and there to remove formerly hard-wired assumptions about the result type, collation, etc of a SubscriptingRef expression node; and to remove assumptions that the subscript values must be integers. One useful side-effect of this is that we now have a less squishy mechanism for identifying whether a data type is a "true" array: instead of wiring in weird rules about typlen, we can look to see if pg_type.typsubscript == F_ARRAY_SUBSCRIPT_HANDLER. For this to be bulletproof, we have to forbid user-defined types from using that handler directly; but there seems no good reason for them to do so. This patch also removes assumptions that the number of subscripts is limited to MAXDIM (6), or indeed has any hard-wired limit. That limit still applies to types handled by array_subscript_handler or raw_array_subscript_handler, but to discourage other dependencies on this constant, I've moved it from c.h to utils/array.h. Dmitry Dolgov, reviewed at various times by Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov, Peter Eisentraut, Pavel Stehule Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVDuGBv=M0FqBYX8DPebS3F_0KQ6OVFobGJPM507_SZ_w@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVovR+XY4mfk-7oNk-rF91gH0PebnNfuUjuuDsyHjOcVA@mail.gmail.com
2020-12-09 18:40:37 +01:00
/* API for out-of-line evaluation subroutines returning bool */
typedef bool (*ExecEvalBoolSubroutine) (ExprState *state,
struct ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
Redesign the caching done by get_cached_rowtype(). Previously, get_cached_rowtype() cached a pointer to a reference-counted tuple descriptor from the typcache, relying on the ExprContextCallback mechanism to release the tupdesc refcount when the expression tree using the tupdesc was destroyed. This worked fine when it was designed, but the introduction of within-DO-block COMMITs broke it. The refcount is logged in a transaction-lifespan resource owner, but plpgsql won't destroy simple expressions made within the DO block (before its first commit) until the DO block is exited. That results in a warning about a leaked tupdesc refcount when the COMMIT destroys the original resource owner, and then an error about the active resource owner not holding a matching refcount when the expression is destroyed. To fix, get rid of the need to have a shutdown callback at all, by instead caching a pointer to the relevant typcache entry. Those survive for the life of the backend, so we needn't worry about the pointer becoming stale. (For registered RECORD types, we can still cache a pointer to the tupdesc, knowing that it won't change for the life of the backend.) This mechanism has been in use in plpgsql and expandedrecord.c since commit 4b93f5799, and seems to work well. This change requires modifying the ExprEvalStep structs used by the relevant expression step types, which is slightly worrisome for back-patching. However, there seems no good reason for extensions to be familiar with the details of these particular sub-structs. Per report from Rohit Bhogate. Back-patch to v11 where within-DO-block COMMITs became a thing. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAV6ZkQRCVBh8qAY+SZiHnz+U+FqAGBBDaDTjF2yiKa2nJSLKg@mail.gmail.com
2021-04-13 19:37:07 +02:00
/* ExprEvalSteps that cache a composite type's tupdesc need one of these */
/* (it fits in-line in some step types, otherwise allocate out-of-line) */
typedef struct ExprEvalRowtypeCache
{
/*
* cacheptr points to composite type's TypeCacheEntry if tupdesc_id is not
* 0; or for an anonymous RECORD type, it points directly at the cached
* tupdesc for the type, and tupdesc_id is 0. (We'd use separate fields
* if space were not at a premium.) Initial state is cacheptr == NULL.
*/
void *cacheptr;
uint64 tupdesc_id; /* last-seen tupdesc identifier, or 0 */
} ExprEvalRowtypeCache;
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
/*
* Discriminator for ExprEvalSteps.
*
* Identifies the operation to be executed and which member in the
* ExprEvalStep->d union is valid.
*
* The order of entries needs to be kept in sync with the dispatch_table[]
* array in execExprInterp.c:ExecInterpExpr().
*/
typedef enum ExprEvalOp
{
/* entire expression has been evaluated completely, return */
EEOP_DONE,
/* apply slot_getsomeattrs on corresponding tuple slot */
EEOP_INNER_FETCHSOME,
EEOP_OUTER_FETCHSOME,
EEOP_SCAN_FETCHSOME,
/* compute non-system Var value */
EEOP_INNER_VAR,
EEOP_OUTER_VAR,
EEOP_SCAN_VAR,
/* compute system Var value */
EEOP_INNER_SYSVAR,
EEOP_OUTER_SYSVAR,
EEOP_SCAN_SYSVAR,
/* compute wholerow Var */
EEOP_WHOLEROW,
Perform slot validity checks in a separate pass over expression. This reduces code duplication a bit, but the primary benefit that it makes JITing expression evaluation easier. When doing so we can't, as previously done in the interpreted case, really change opcode without recompiling. Nor dow we just carry around unnecessary branches to avoid re-checking over and over. As a minor side-effect this makes ExecEvalStepOp() O(log(N)) rather than O(N). Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170901064131.tazjxwus3k2w3ybh@alap3.anarazel.de
2017-12-29 21:38:15 +01:00
/*
Expression evaluation based aggregate transition invocation. Previously aggregate transition and combination functions were invoked by special case code in nodeAgg.c, evaluating input and filters separately using the expression evaluation machinery. That turns out to not be great for performance for several reasons: - repeated expression evaluations have some cost - the transition functions invocations are poorly predicted, as commonly there are multiple aggregates in a query, resulting in the same call-stack invoking different functions. - filter and input computation had to be done separately - the special case code made it hard to implement JITing of the whole transition function invocation Address this by building one large expression that computes input, evaluates filters, and invokes transition functions. This leads to moderate speedups in queries bottlenecked by aggregate computations, and enables large speedups for similar cases once JITing is done. There's potential for further improvement: - It'd be nice if we could simplify the somewhat expensive aggstate->all_pergroups lookups. - right now there's still an advance_transition_function invocation in nodeAgg.c, leading to some code duplication. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170901064131.tazjxwus3k2w3ybh@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-01-09 22:25:38 +01:00
* Compute non-system Var value, assign it into ExprState's resultslot.
* These are not used if a CheckVarSlotCompatibility() check would be
* needed.
Perform slot validity checks in a separate pass over expression. This reduces code duplication a bit, but the primary benefit that it makes JITing expression evaluation easier. When doing so we can't, as previously done in the interpreted case, really change opcode without recompiling. Nor dow we just carry around unnecessary branches to avoid re-checking over and over. As a minor side-effect this makes ExecEvalStepOp() O(log(N)) rather than O(N). Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170901064131.tazjxwus3k2w3ybh@alap3.anarazel.de
2017-12-29 21:38:15 +01:00
*/
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
EEOP_ASSIGN_INNER_VAR,
EEOP_ASSIGN_OUTER_VAR,
EEOP_ASSIGN_SCAN_VAR,
/* assign ExprState's resvalue/resnull to a column of its resultslot */
EEOP_ASSIGN_TMP,
/* ditto, applying MakeExpandedObjectReadOnly() */
EEOP_ASSIGN_TMP_MAKE_RO,
/* evaluate Const value */
EEOP_CONST,
/*
* Evaluate function call (including OpExprs etc). For speed, we
* distinguish in the opcode whether the function is strict and/or
* requires usage stats tracking.
*/
EEOP_FUNCEXPR,
EEOP_FUNCEXPR_STRICT,
EEOP_FUNCEXPR_FUSAGE,
EEOP_FUNCEXPR_STRICT_FUSAGE,
/*
* Evaluate boolean AND expression, one step per subexpression. FIRST/LAST
* subexpressions are special-cased for performance. Since AND always has
* at least two subexpressions, FIRST and LAST never apply to the same
* subexpression.
*/
EEOP_BOOL_AND_STEP_FIRST,
EEOP_BOOL_AND_STEP,
EEOP_BOOL_AND_STEP_LAST,
/* similarly for boolean OR expression */
EEOP_BOOL_OR_STEP_FIRST,
EEOP_BOOL_OR_STEP,
EEOP_BOOL_OR_STEP_LAST,
/* evaluate boolean NOT expression */
EEOP_BOOL_NOT_STEP,
/* simplified version of BOOL_AND_STEP for use by ExecQual() */
EEOP_QUAL,
/* unconditional jump to another step */
EEOP_JUMP,
/* conditional jumps based on current result value */
EEOP_JUMP_IF_NULL,
EEOP_JUMP_IF_NOT_NULL,
EEOP_JUMP_IF_NOT_TRUE,
/* perform NULL tests for scalar values */
EEOP_NULLTEST_ISNULL,
EEOP_NULLTEST_ISNOTNULL,
/* perform NULL tests for row values */
EEOP_NULLTEST_ROWISNULL,
EEOP_NULLTEST_ROWISNOTNULL,
/* evaluate a BooleanTest expression */
EEOP_BOOLTEST_IS_TRUE,
EEOP_BOOLTEST_IS_NOT_TRUE,
EEOP_BOOLTEST_IS_FALSE,
EEOP_BOOLTEST_IS_NOT_FALSE,
/* evaluate PARAM_EXEC/EXTERN parameters */
EEOP_PARAM_EXEC,
EEOP_PARAM_EXTERN,
Rearrange execution of PARAM_EXTERN Params for plpgsql's benefit. This patch does three interrelated things: * Create a new expression execution step type EEOP_PARAM_CALLBACK and add the infrastructure needed for add-on modules to generate that. As discussed, the best control mechanism for that seems to be to add another hook function to ParamListInfo, which will be called by ExecInitExpr if it's supplied and a PARAM_EXTERN Param is found. For stand-alone expressions, we add a new entry point to allow the ParamListInfo to be specified directly, since it can't be retrieved from the parent plan node's EState. * Redesign the API for the ParamListInfo paramFetch hook so that the ParamExternData array can be entirely virtual. This also lets us get rid of ParamListInfo.paramMask, instead leaving it to the paramFetch hook to decide which param IDs should be accessible or not. plpgsql_param_fetch was already doing the identical masking check, so having callers do it too seemed redundant. While I was at it, I added a "speculative" flag to paramFetch that the planner can specify as TRUE to avoid unwanted failures. This solves an ancient problem for plpgsql that it couldn't provide values of non-DTYPE_VAR variables to the planner for fear of triggering premature "record not assigned yet" or "field not found" errors during planning. * Rework plpgsql to get rid of the need for "unshared" parameter lists, by dint of turning the single ParamListInfo per estate into a nearly read-only data structure that doesn't instantiate any per-variable data. Instead, the paramFetch hook controls access to per-variable data and can make the right decisions on the fly, replacing the cases that we used to need multiple ParamListInfos for. This might perhaps have been a performance loss on its own, but by using a paramCompile hook we can bypass plpgsql_param_fetch entirely during normal query execution. (It's now only called when, eg, we copy the ParamListInfo into a cursor portal. copyParamList() or SerializeParamList() effectively instantiate the virtual parameter array as a simple physical array without a paramFetch hook, which is what we want in those cases.) This allows reverting most of commit 6c82d8d1f, though I kept the cosmetic code-consolidation aspects of that (eg the assign_simple_var function). Performance testing shows this to be at worst a break-even change, and it can provide wins ranging up to 20% in test cases involving accesses to fields of "record" variables. The fact that values of such variables can now be exposed to the planner might produce wins in some situations, too, but I've not pursued that angle. In passing, remove the "parent" pointer from the arguments to ExecInitExprRec and related functions, instead storing that pointer in a transient field in ExprState. The ParamListInfo pointer for a stand-alone expression is handled the same way; we'd otherwise have had to add yet another recursively-passed-down argument in expression compilation. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/32589.1513706441@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-12-21 18:57:41 +01:00
EEOP_PARAM_CALLBACK,
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
/* return CaseTestExpr value */
EEOP_CASE_TESTVAL,
/* apply MakeExpandedObjectReadOnly() to target value */
EEOP_MAKE_READONLY,
/* evaluate assorted special-purpose expression types */
EEOP_IOCOERCE,
Add soft error handling to some expression nodes This adjusts the code for CoerceViaIO and CoerceToDomain expression nodes to handle errors softly. For CoerceViaIo, this adds a new ExprEvalStep opcode EEOP_IOCOERCE_SAFE, which is implemented in the new accompanying function ExecEvalCoerceViaIOSafe(). The only difference from EEOP_IOCOERCE's inline implementation is that the input function receives an ErrorSaveContext via the function's FunctionCallInfo.context, which it can use to handle errors softly. For CoerceToDomain, this simply entails replacing the ereport() in ExecEvalConstraintNotNull() and ExecEvalConstraintCheck() by errsave() passing it the ErrorSaveContext passed in the expression's ExprEvalStep. In both cases, the ErrorSaveContext to be used is passed by setting ExprState.escontext to point to it before calling ExecInitExprRec() on the expression tree whose errors are to be handled softly. Note that there's no functional change as of this commit as no call site of ExecInitExprRec() has been changed. This is intended for implementing new SQL/JSON expression nodes in future commits. Extracted from a much larger patch to add SQL/JSON query functions. Author: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> Author: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> Author: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> Author: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> Author: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Reviewers have included (in no particular order) Andres Freund, Alexander Korotkov, Pavel Stehule, Andrew Alsup, Erik Rijkers, Zihong Yu, Himanshu Upadhyaya, Daniel Gustafsson, Justin Pryzby, Álvaro Herrera, Jian He, Peter Eisentraut Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd0bb935-0158-78a7-08b5-904886deac4b@postgrespro.ru Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d%40postgresql.org Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqHROpf9e644D8BRqYvaAPmgBZVup-xKMDPk-nd4EpgzHw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqE4XTdfb1nW=Ojoy_tQSRhYt-q_kb6i5d4xcKyrLC1Nbg@mail.gmail.com
2024-01-24 05:35:22 +01:00
EEOP_IOCOERCE_SAFE,
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
EEOP_DISTINCT,
Do execGrouping.c via expression eval machinery, take two. This has a performance benefit on own, although not hugely so. The primary benefit is that it will allow for to JIT tuple deforming and comparator invocations. Large parts of this were previously committed (773aec7aa), but the commit contained an omission around cross-type comparisons and was thus reverted. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20171129080934.amqqkke2zjtekd4t@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-02-16 06:55:31 +01:00
EEOP_NOT_DISTINCT,
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
EEOP_NULLIF,
Add back SQLValueFunction for SQL keywords This is equivalent to a revert of f193883 and fb32748, with the addition that the declaration of the SQLValueFunction node needs to gain a couple of node_attr for query jumbling. The performance impact of removing the function call inlining is proving to be too huge for some workloads where these are used. A worst-case test case of involving only simple SELECT queries with a SQL keyword is proving to lead to a reduction of 10% in TPS via pgbench and prepared queries on a high-end machine. None of the tests I ran back for this set of changes saw such a huge gap, but Alexander Lakhin and Andres Freund have found that this can be noticeable. Keeping the older performance would mean to do more inlining in the executor when using COERCE_SQL_SYNTAX for a function expression, similarly to what SQLValueFunction does. This requires more redesign work and there is little time until 16beta1 is released, so for now reverting the change is the best way forward, bringing back the previous performance. Bump catalog version. Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/b32bed1b-0746-9b20-1472-4bdc9ca66d52@gmail.com
2023-05-17 03:19:17 +02:00
EEOP_SQLVALUEFUNCTION,
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
EEOP_CURRENTOFEXPR,
Identity columns This is the SQL standard-conforming variant of PostgreSQL's serial columns. It fixes a few usability issues that serial columns have: - CREATE TABLE / LIKE copies default but refers to same sequence - cannot add/drop serialness with ALTER TABLE - dropping default does not drop sequence - need to grant separate privileges to sequence - other slight weirdnesses because serial is some kind of special macro Reviewed-by: Vitaly Burovoy <vitaly.burovoy@gmail.com>
2017-04-06 14:33:16 +02:00
EEOP_NEXTVALUEEXPR,
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
EEOP_ARRAYEXPR,
EEOP_ARRAYCOERCE,
EEOP_ROW,
/*
* Compare two individual elements of each of two compared ROW()
* expressions. Skip to ROWCOMPARE_FINAL if elements are not equal.
*/
EEOP_ROWCOMPARE_STEP,
/* evaluate boolean value based on previous ROWCOMPARE_STEP operations */
EEOP_ROWCOMPARE_FINAL,
/* evaluate GREATEST() or LEAST() */
EEOP_MINMAX,
/* evaluate FieldSelect expression */
EEOP_FIELDSELECT,
/*
* Deform tuple before evaluating new values for individual fields in a
* FieldStore expression.
*/
EEOP_FIELDSTORE_DEFORM,
/*
* Form the new tuple for a FieldStore expression. Individual fields will
* have been evaluated into columns of the tuple deformed by the preceding
* DEFORM step.
*/
EEOP_FIELDSTORE_FORM,
Support subscripting of arbitrary types, not only arrays. This patch generalizes the subscripting infrastructure so that any data type can be subscripted, if it provides a handler function to define what that means. Traditional variable-length (varlena) arrays all use array_subscript_handler(), while the existing fixed-length types that support subscripting use raw_array_subscript_handler(). It's expected that other types that want to use subscripting notation will define their own handlers. (This patch provides no such new features, though; it only lays the foundation for them.) To do this, move the parser's semantic processing of subscripts (including coercion to whatever data type is required) into a method callback supplied by the handler. On the execution side, replace the ExecEvalSubscriptingRef* layer of functions with direct calls to callback-supplied execution routines. (Thus, essentially no new run-time overhead should be caused by this patch. Indeed, there is room to remove some overhead by supplying specialized execution routines. This patch does a little bit in that line, but more could be done.) Additional work is required here and there to remove formerly hard-wired assumptions about the result type, collation, etc of a SubscriptingRef expression node; and to remove assumptions that the subscript values must be integers. One useful side-effect of this is that we now have a less squishy mechanism for identifying whether a data type is a "true" array: instead of wiring in weird rules about typlen, we can look to see if pg_type.typsubscript == F_ARRAY_SUBSCRIPT_HANDLER. For this to be bulletproof, we have to forbid user-defined types from using that handler directly; but there seems no good reason for them to do so. This patch also removes assumptions that the number of subscripts is limited to MAXDIM (6), or indeed has any hard-wired limit. That limit still applies to types handled by array_subscript_handler or raw_array_subscript_handler, but to discourage other dependencies on this constant, I've moved it from c.h to utils/array.h. Dmitry Dolgov, reviewed at various times by Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov, Peter Eisentraut, Pavel Stehule Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVDuGBv=M0FqBYX8DPebS3F_0KQ6OVFobGJPM507_SZ_w@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVovR+XY4mfk-7oNk-rF91gH0PebnNfuUjuuDsyHjOcVA@mail.gmail.com
2020-12-09 18:40:37 +01:00
/* Process container subscripts; possibly short-circuit result to NULL */
EEOP_SBSREF_SUBSCRIPTS,
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
/*
Renaming for new subscripting mechanism Over at patch https://commitfest.postgresql.org/21/1062/ Dmitry wants to introduce a more generic subscription mechanism, which allows subscripting not only arrays but also other object types such as JSONB. That functionality is introduced in a largish invasive patch, out of which this internal renaming patch was extracted. Author: Dmitry Dolgov Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcUK4EqPAu7XRRO5CCjMwhz5zvg+rfWuLzVoxp_5sKS6=w@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-01 16:50:32 +01:00
* Compute old container element/slice when a SubscriptingRef assignment
* expression contains SubscriptingRef/FieldStore subexpressions. Value is
* accessed using the CaseTest mechanism.
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
*/
Renaming for new subscripting mechanism Over at patch https://commitfest.postgresql.org/21/1062/ Dmitry wants to introduce a more generic subscription mechanism, which allows subscripting not only arrays but also other object types such as JSONB. That functionality is introduced in a largish invasive patch, out of which this internal renaming patch was extracted. Author: Dmitry Dolgov Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcUK4EqPAu7XRRO5CCjMwhz5zvg+rfWuLzVoxp_5sKS6=w@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-01 16:50:32 +01:00
EEOP_SBSREF_OLD,
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
Renaming for new subscripting mechanism Over at patch https://commitfest.postgresql.org/21/1062/ Dmitry wants to introduce a more generic subscription mechanism, which allows subscripting not only arrays but also other object types such as JSONB. That functionality is introduced in a largish invasive patch, out of which this internal renaming patch was extracted. Author: Dmitry Dolgov Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcUK4EqPAu7XRRO5CCjMwhz5zvg+rfWuLzVoxp_5sKS6=w@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-01 16:50:32 +01:00
/* compute new value for SubscriptingRef assignment expression */
EEOP_SBSREF_ASSIGN,
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
Renaming for new subscripting mechanism Over at patch https://commitfest.postgresql.org/21/1062/ Dmitry wants to introduce a more generic subscription mechanism, which allows subscripting not only arrays but also other object types such as JSONB. That functionality is introduced in a largish invasive patch, out of which this internal renaming patch was extracted. Author: Dmitry Dolgov Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcUK4EqPAu7XRRO5CCjMwhz5zvg+rfWuLzVoxp_5sKS6=w@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-01 16:50:32 +01:00
/* compute element/slice for SubscriptingRef fetch expression */
EEOP_SBSREF_FETCH,
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
/* evaluate value for CoerceToDomainValue */
EEOP_DOMAIN_TESTVAL,
/* evaluate a domain's NOT NULL constraint */
EEOP_DOMAIN_NOTNULL,
/* evaluate a single domain CHECK constraint */
EEOP_DOMAIN_CHECK,
/* evaluate assorted special-purpose expression types */
EEOP_CONVERT_ROWTYPE,
EEOP_SCALARARRAYOP,
Speedup ScalarArrayOpExpr evaluation ScalarArrayOpExprs with "useOr=true" and a set of Consts on the righthand side have traditionally been evaluated by using a linear search over the array. When these arrays contain large numbers of elements then this linear search could become a significant part of execution time. Here we add a new method of evaluating ScalarArrayOpExpr expressions to allow them to be evaluated by first building a hash table containing each element, then on subsequent evaluations, we just probe that hash table to determine if there is a match. The planner is in charge of determining when this optimization is possible and it enables it by setting hashfuncid in the ScalarArrayOpExpr. The executor will only perform the hash table evaluation when the hashfuncid is set. This means that not all cases are optimized. For example CHECK constraints containing an IN clause won't go through the planner, so won't get the hashfuncid set. We could maybe do something about that at some later date. The reason we're not doing it now is from fear that we may slow down cases where the expression is evaluated only once. Those cases can be common, for example, a single row INSERT to a table with a CHECK constraint containing an IN clause. In the planner, we enable this when there are suitable hash functions for the ScalarArrayOpExpr's operator and only when there is at least MIN_ARRAY_SIZE_FOR_HASHED_SAOP elements in the array. The threshold is currently set to 9. Author: James Coleman, David Rowley Reviewed-by: David Rowley, Tomas Vondra, Heikki Linnakangas Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAaqYe8x62+=wn0zvNKCj55tPpg-JBHzhZFFc6ANovdqFw7-dA@mail.gmail.com
2021-04-08 13:51:22 +02:00
EEOP_HASHED_SCALARARRAYOP,
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
EEOP_XMLEXPR,
SQL/JSON: add standard JSON constructor functions This commit introduces the SQL/JSON standard-conforming constructors for JSON types: JSON_ARRAY() JSON_ARRAYAGG() JSON_OBJECT() JSON_OBJECTAGG() Most of the functionality was already present in PostgreSQL-specific functions, but these include some new functionality such as the ability to skip or include NULL values, and to allow duplicate keys or throw error when they are found, as well as the standard specified syntax to specify output type and format. Author: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> Author: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> Author: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> Author: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Reviewers have included (in no particular order) Andres Freund, Alexander Korotkov, Pavel Stehule, Andrew Alsup, Erik Rijkers, Zihong Yu, Himanshu Upadhyaya, Daniel Gustafsson, Justin Pryzby. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAF4Au4w2x-5LTnN_bxky-mq4=WOqsGsxSpENCzHRAzSnEd8+WQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd0bb935-0158-78a7-08b5-904886deac4b@postgrespro.ru Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d%40postgresql.org
2023-03-29 12:11:36 +02:00
EEOP_JSON_CONSTRUCTOR,
SQL/JSON: support the IS JSON predicate This patch introduces the SQL standard IS JSON predicate. It operates on text and bytea values representing JSON, as well as on the json and jsonb types. Each test has IS and IS NOT variants and supports a WITH UNIQUE KEYS flag. The tests are: IS JSON [VALUE] IS JSON ARRAY IS JSON OBJECT IS JSON SCALAR These should be self-explanatory. The WITH UNIQUE KEYS flag makes these return false when duplicate keys exist in any object within the value, not necessarily directly contained in the outermost object. Author: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> Author: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> Author: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> Author: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Author: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> Reviewers have included (in no particular order) Andres Freund, Alexander Korotkov, Pavel Stehule, Andrew Alsup, Erik Rijkers, Zihong Yu, Himanshu Upadhyaya, Daniel Gustafsson, Justin Pryzby. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAF4Au4w2x-5LTnN_bxky-mq4=WOqsGsxSpENCzHRAzSnEd8+WQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd0bb935-0158-78a7-08b5-904886deac4b@postgrespro.ru Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d%40postgresql.org
2023-03-31 22:34:04 +02:00
EEOP_IS_JSON,
Add SQL/JSON query functions This introduces the following SQL/JSON functions for querying JSON data using jsonpath expressions: JSON_EXISTS(), which can be used to apply a jsonpath expression to a JSON value to check if it yields any values. JSON_QUERY(), which can be used to to apply a jsonpath expression to a JSON value to get a JSON object, an array, or a string. There are various options to control whether multi-value result uses array wrappers and whether the singleton scalar strings are quoted or not. JSON_VALUE(), which can be used to apply a jsonpath expression to a JSON value to return a single scalar value, producing an error if it multiple values are matched. Both JSON_VALUE() and JSON_QUERY() functions have options for handling EMPTY and ERROR conditions, which can be used to specify the behavior when no values are matched and when an error occurs during jsonpath evaluation, respectively. Author: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> Author: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> Author: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> Author: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> Author: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Author: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> Author: Jian He <jian.universality@gmail.com> Reviewers have included (in no particular order): Andres Freund, Alexander Korotkov, Pavel Stehule, Andrew Alsup, Erik Rijkers, Zihong Yu, Himanshu Upadhyaya, Daniel Gustafsson, Justin Pryzby, Álvaro Herrera, Jian He, Anton A. Melnikov, Nikita Malakhov, Peter Eisentraut, Tomas Vondra Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd0bb935-0158-78a7-08b5-904886deac4b@postgrespro.ru Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d%40postgresql.org Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqHROpf9e644D8BRqYvaAPmgBZVup-xKMDPk-nd4EpgzHw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqE4XTdfb1nW=Ojoy_tQSRhYt-q_kb6i5d4xcKyrLC1Nbg@mail.gmail.com
2024-03-21 09:06:27 +01:00
EEOP_JSONEXPR_PATH,
EEOP_JSONEXPR_COERCION,
EEOP_JSONEXPR_COERCION_FINISH,
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
EEOP_AGGREF,
EEOP_GROUPING_FUNC,
EEOP_WINDOW_FUNC,
Add RETURNING support to MERGE. This allows a RETURNING clause to be appended to a MERGE query, to return values based on each row inserted, updated, or deleted. As with plain INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE commands, the returned values are based on the new contents of the target table for INSERT and UPDATE actions, and on its old contents for DELETE actions. Values from the source relation may also be returned. As with INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE, the output of MERGE ... RETURNING may be used as the source relation for other operations such as WITH queries and COPY commands. Additionally, a special function merge_action() is provided, which returns 'INSERT', 'UPDATE', or 'DELETE', depending on the action executed for each row. The merge_action() function can be used anywhere in the RETURNING list, including in arbitrary expressions and subqueries, but it is an error to use it anywhere outside of a MERGE query's RETURNING list. Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Isaac Morland, Vik Fearing, Alvaro Herrera, Gurjeet Singh, Jian He, Jeff Davis, Merlin Moncure, Peter Eisentraut, and Wolfgang Walther. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCWePEGQR5LBn-vD6SfeLZafzEm2Qy_L_Oky2=qw2w3Pzg@mail.gmail.com
2024-03-17 14:58:59 +01:00
EEOP_MERGE_SUPPORT_FUNC,
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
EEOP_SUBPLAN,
Expression evaluation based aggregate transition invocation. Previously aggregate transition and combination functions were invoked by special case code in nodeAgg.c, evaluating input and filters separately using the expression evaluation machinery. That turns out to not be great for performance for several reasons: - repeated expression evaluations have some cost - the transition functions invocations are poorly predicted, as commonly there are multiple aggregates in a query, resulting in the same call-stack invoking different functions. - filter and input computation had to be done separately - the special case code made it hard to implement JITing of the whole transition function invocation Address this by building one large expression that computes input, evaluates filters, and invokes transition functions. This leads to moderate speedups in queries bottlenecked by aggregate computations, and enables large speedups for similar cases once JITing is done. There's potential for further improvement: - It'd be nice if we could simplify the somewhat expensive aggstate->all_pergroups lookups. - right now there's still an advance_transition_function invocation in nodeAgg.c, leading to some code duplication. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170901064131.tazjxwus3k2w3ybh@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-01-09 22:25:38 +01:00
/* aggregation related nodes */
EEOP_AGG_STRICT_DESERIALIZE,
EEOP_AGG_DESERIALIZE,
Change function call information to be variable length. Before this change FunctionCallInfoData, the struct arguments etc for V1 function calls are stored in, always had space for FUNC_MAX_ARGS/100 arguments, storing datums and their nullness in two arrays. For nearly every function call 100 arguments is far more than needed, therefore wasting memory. Arg and argnull being two separate arrays also guarantees that to access a single argument, two cachelines have to be touched. Change the layout so there's a single variable-length array with pairs of value / isnull. That drastically reduces memory consumption for most function calls (on x86-64 a two argument function now uses 64bytes, previously 936 bytes), and makes it very likely that argument value and its nullness are on the same cacheline. Arguments are stored in a new NullableDatum struct, which, due to padding, needs more memory per argument than before. But as usually far fewer arguments are stored, and individual arguments are cheaper to access, that's still a clear win. It's likely that there's other places where conversion to NullableDatum arrays would make sense, e.g. TupleTableSlots, but that's for another commit. Because the function call information is now variable-length allocations have to take the number of arguments into account. For heap allocations that can be done with SizeForFunctionCallInfoData(), for on-stack allocations there's a new LOCAL_FCINFO(name, nargs) macro that helps to allocate an appropriately sized and aligned variable. Some places with stack allocation function call information don't know the number of arguments at compile time, and currently variably sized stack allocations aren't allowed in postgres. Therefore allow for FUNC_MAX_ARGS space in these cases. They're not that common, so for now that seems acceptable. Because of the need to allocate FunctionCallInfo of the appropriate size, older extensions may need to update their code. To avoid subtle breakages, the FunctionCallInfoData struct has been renamed to FunctionCallInfoBaseData. Most code only references FunctionCallInfo, so that shouldn't cause much collateral damage. This change is also a prerequisite for more efficient expression JIT compilation (by allocating the function call information on the stack, allowing LLVM to optimize it away); previously the size of the call information caused problems inside LLVM's optimizer. Author: Andres Freund Reviewed-By: Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180605172952.x34m5uz6ju6enaem@alap3.anarazel.de
2019-01-26 23:17:52 +01:00
EEOP_AGG_STRICT_INPUT_CHECK_ARGS,
EEOP_AGG_STRICT_INPUT_CHECK_NULLS,
Extend ExecBuildAggTrans() to support a NULL pointer check. Optionally push a step to check for a NULL pointer to the pergroup state. This will be important for disk-based hash aggregation in combination with grouping sets. When memory limits are reached, a given tuple may find its per-group state for some grouping sets but not others. For the former, it advances the per-group state as normal; for the latter, it skips evaluation and the calling code will have to spill the tuple and reprocess it in a later batch. Add the NULL check as a separate expression step because in some common cases it's not needed. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200221202212.ssb2qpmdgrnx52sj%40alap3.anarazel.de
2020-03-05 02:20:20 +01:00
EEOP_AGG_PLAIN_PERGROUP_NULLCHECK,
expression eval: Reduce number of steps for agg transition invocations. Do so by combining the various steps that are part of aggregate transition function invocation into one larger step. As some of the current steps are only necessary for some aggregates, have one variant of the aggregate transition step for each possible combination. To avoid further manual copies of code in the different transition step implementations, move most of the code into helper functions marked as "always inline". The benefit of this change is an increase in performance when aggregating lots of rows. This comes in part due to the reduced number of indirect jumps due to the reduced number of steps, and in part by reducing redundant setup code across steps. This mainly benefits interpreted execution, but the code generated by JIT is also improved a bit. As a nice side-effect it also ends up making the code a bit simpler. A small additional optimization is removing the need to set aggstate->curaggcontext before calling ExecAggInitGroup, choosing to instead passign curaggcontext as an argument. It was, in contrast to other aggregate related functions, only needed to fetch a memory context to copy the transition value into. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20191023163849.sosqbfs5yenocez3@alap3.anarazel.de https://postgr.es/m/5c371df7cee903e8cd4c685f90c6c72086d3a2dc.camel@j-davis.com
2020-02-24 23:39:22 +01:00
EEOP_AGG_PLAIN_TRANS_INIT_STRICT_BYVAL,
EEOP_AGG_PLAIN_TRANS_STRICT_BYVAL,
Expression evaluation based aggregate transition invocation. Previously aggregate transition and combination functions were invoked by special case code in nodeAgg.c, evaluating input and filters separately using the expression evaluation machinery. That turns out to not be great for performance for several reasons: - repeated expression evaluations have some cost - the transition functions invocations are poorly predicted, as commonly there are multiple aggregates in a query, resulting in the same call-stack invoking different functions. - filter and input computation had to be done separately - the special case code made it hard to implement JITing of the whole transition function invocation Address this by building one large expression that computes input, evaluates filters, and invokes transition functions. This leads to moderate speedups in queries bottlenecked by aggregate computations, and enables large speedups for similar cases once JITing is done. There's potential for further improvement: - It'd be nice if we could simplify the somewhat expensive aggstate->all_pergroups lookups. - right now there's still an advance_transition_function invocation in nodeAgg.c, leading to some code duplication. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170901064131.tazjxwus3k2w3ybh@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-01-09 22:25:38 +01:00
EEOP_AGG_PLAIN_TRANS_BYVAL,
expression eval: Reduce number of steps for agg transition invocations. Do so by combining the various steps that are part of aggregate transition function invocation into one larger step. As some of the current steps are only necessary for some aggregates, have one variant of the aggregate transition step for each possible combination. To avoid further manual copies of code in the different transition step implementations, move most of the code into helper functions marked as "always inline". The benefit of this change is an increase in performance when aggregating lots of rows. This comes in part due to the reduced number of indirect jumps due to the reduced number of steps, and in part by reducing redundant setup code across steps. This mainly benefits interpreted execution, but the code generated by JIT is also improved a bit. As a nice side-effect it also ends up making the code a bit simpler. A small additional optimization is removing the need to set aggstate->curaggcontext before calling ExecAggInitGroup, choosing to instead passign curaggcontext as an argument. It was, in contrast to other aggregate related functions, only needed to fetch a memory context to copy the transition value into. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20191023163849.sosqbfs5yenocez3@alap3.anarazel.de https://postgr.es/m/5c371df7cee903e8cd4c685f90c6c72086d3a2dc.camel@j-davis.com
2020-02-24 23:39:22 +01:00
EEOP_AGG_PLAIN_TRANS_INIT_STRICT_BYREF,
EEOP_AGG_PLAIN_TRANS_STRICT_BYREF,
EEOP_AGG_PLAIN_TRANS_BYREF,
Improve performance of ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggreagtes have, since implemented in Postgres, been executed by always performing a sort in nodeAgg.c to sort the tuples in the current group into the correct order before calling the transition function on the sorted tuples. This was not great as often there might be an index that could have provided pre-sorted input and allowed the transition functions to be called as the rows come in, rather than having to store them in a tuplestore in order to sort them once all the tuples for the group have arrived. Here we change the planner so it requests a path with a sort order which supports the most amount of ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregate functions and add new code to the executor to allow it to support the processing of ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates where the tuples are already sorted in the correct order. Since there can be many ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates in any given query level, it's very possible that we can't find an order that suits all of these aggregates. The sort order that the planner chooses is simply the one that suits the most aggregate functions. We take the most strictly sorted variation of each order and see how many aggregate functions can use that, then we try again with the order of the remaining aggregates to see if another order would suit more aggregate functions. For example: SELECT agg(a ORDER BY a),agg2(a ORDER BY a,b) ... would request the sort order to be {a, b} because {a} is a subset of the sort order of {a,b}, but; SELECT agg(a ORDER BY a),agg2(a ORDER BY c) ... would just pick a plan ordered by {a} (we give precedence to aggregates which are earlier in the targetlist). SELECT agg(a ORDER BY a),agg2(a ORDER BY b),agg3(a ORDER BY b) ... would choose to order by {b} since two aggregates suit that vs just one that requires input ordered by {a}. Author: David Rowley Reviewed-by: Ronan Dunklau, James Coleman, Ranier Vilela, Richard Guo, Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvpHzfo92%3DR4W0%2BxVua3BUYCKMckWAmo-2t_KiXN-wYH%3Dw%40mail.gmail.com
2022-08-02 13:11:45 +02:00
EEOP_AGG_PRESORTED_DISTINCT_SINGLE,
EEOP_AGG_PRESORTED_DISTINCT_MULTI,
Expression evaluation based aggregate transition invocation. Previously aggregate transition and combination functions were invoked by special case code in nodeAgg.c, evaluating input and filters separately using the expression evaluation machinery. That turns out to not be great for performance for several reasons: - repeated expression evaluations have some cost - the transition functions invocations are poorly predicted, as commonly there are multiple aggregates in a query, resulting in the same call-stack invoking different functions. - filter and input computation had to be done separately - the special case code made it hard to implement JITing of the whole transition function invocation Address this by building one large expression that computes input, evaluates filters, and invokes transition functions. This leads to moderate speedups in queries bottlenecked by aggregate computations, and enables large speedups for similar cases once JITing is done. There's potential for further improvement: - It'd be nice if we could simplify the somewhat expensive aggstate->all_pergroups lookups. - right now there's still an advance_transition_function invocation in nodeAgg.c, leading to some code duplication. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170901064131.tazjxwus3k2w3ybh@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-01-09 22:25:38 +01:00
EEOP_AGG_ORDERED_TRANS_DATUM,
EEOP_AGG_ORDERED_TRANS_TUPLE,
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
/* non-existent operation, used e.g. to check array lengths */
EEOP_LAST
} ExprEvalOp;
typedef struct ExprEvalStep
{
/*
* Instruction to be executed. During instruction preparation this is an
* enum ExprEvalOp, but later it can be changed to some other type, e.g. a
* pointer for computed goto (that's why it's an intptr_t).
*/
intptr_t opcode;
/* where to store the result of this step */
Datum *resvalue;
bool *resnull;
/*
* Inline data for the operation. Inline data is faster to access, but
* also bloats the size of all instructions. The union should be kept to
* no more than 40 bytes on 64-bit systems (so that the entire struct is
* no more than 64 bytes, a single cacheline on common systems).
*/
union
{
/* for EEOP_INNER/OUTER/SCAN_FETCHSOME */
struct
{
/* attribute number up to which to fetch (inclusive) */
int last_var;
Compute information about EEOP_*_FETCHSOME at expression init time. Previously this information was computed when JIT compiling an expression. But the information is useful for assertions in the non-JIT case too (for assertions), therefore it makes sense to move it. This will, in a followup commit, allow to treat different slot types differently. E.g. for virtual slots there's no need to generate a JIT function to deform the slot. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181105210039.hh4vvi4vwoq5ba2q@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-11-16 07:00:30 +01:00
/* will the type of slot be the same for every invocation */
bool fixed;
/* tuple descriptor, if known */
JIT tuple deforming in LLVM JIT provider. Performing JIT compilation for deforming gains performance benefits over unJITed deforming from compile-time knowledge of the tuple descriptor. Fixed column widths, NOT NULLness, etc can be taken advantage of. Right now the JITed deforming is only used when deforming tuples as part of expression evaluation (and obviously only if the descriptor is known). It's likely to be beneficial in other cases, too. By default tuple deforming is JITed whenever an expression is JIT compiled. There's a separate boolean GUC controlling it, but that's expected to be primarily useful for development and benchmarking. Docs will follow in a later commit containing docs for the whole JIT feature. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170901064131.tazjxwus3k2w3ybh@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-03-26 21:57:19 +02:00
TupleDesc known_desc;
Compute information about EEOP_*_FETCHSOME at expression init time. Previously this information was computed when JIT compiling an expression. But the information is useful for assertions in the non-JIT case too (for assertions), therefore it makes sense to move it. This will, in a followup commit, allow to treat different slot types differently. E.g. for virtual slots there's no need to generate a JIT function to deform the slot. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181105210039.hh4vvi4vwoq5ba2q@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-11-16 07:00:30 +01:00
/* type of slot, can only be relied upon if fixed is set */
const TupleTableSlotOps *kind;
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
} fetch;
/* for EEOP_INNER/OUTER/SCAN_[SYS]VAR[_FIRST] */
struct
{
/* attnum is attr number - 1 for regular VAR ... */
/* but it's just the normal (negative) attr number for SYSVAR */
int attnum;
Oid vartype; /* type OID of variable */
} var;
/* for EEOP_WHOLEROW */
struct
{
Var *var; /* original Var node in plan tree */
bool first; /* first time through, need to initialize? */
bool slow; /* need runtime check for nulls? */
TupleDesc tupdesc; /* descriptor for resulting tuples */
JunkFilter *junkFilter; /* JunkFilter to remove resjunk cols */
} wholerow;
/* for EEOP_ASSIGN_*_VAR */
struct
{
/* target index in ExprState->resultslot->tts_values/nulls */
int resultnum;
/* source attribute number - 1 */
int attnum;
} assign_var;
/* for EEOP_ASSIGN_TMP[_MAKE_RO] */
struct
{
/* target index in ExprState->resultslot->tts_values/nulls */
int resultnum;
} assign_tmp;
/* for EEOP_CONST */
struct
{
/* constant's value */
Datum value;
bool isnull;
} constval;
/* for EEOP_FUNCEXPR_* / NULLIF / DISTINCT */
struct
{
FmgrInfo *finfo; /* function's lookup data */
FunctionCallInfo fcinfo_data; /* arguments etc */
/* faster to access without additional indirection: */
PGFunction fn_addr; /* actual call address */
int nargs; /* number of arguments */
} func;
/* for EEOP_BOOL_*_STEP */
struct
{
bool *anynull; /* track if any input was NULL */
int jumpdone; /* jump here if result determined */
} boolexpr;
/* for EEOP_QUAL */
struct
{
int jumpdone; /* jump here on false or null */
} qualexpr;
/* for EEOP_JUMP[_CONDITION] */
struct
{
int jumpdone; /* target instruction's index */
} jump;
/* for EEOP_NULLTEST_ROWIS[NOT]NULL */
struct
{
Redesign the caching done by get_cached_rowtype(). Previously, get_cached_rowtype() cached a pointer to a reference-counted tuple descriptor from the typcache, relying on the ExprContextCallback mechanism to release the tupdesc refcount when the expression tree using the tupdesc was destroyed. This worked fine when it was designed, but the introduction of within-DO-block COMMITs broke it. The refcount is logged in a transaction-lifespan resource owner, but plpgsql won't destroy simple expressions made within the DO block (before its first commit) until the DO block is exited. That results in a warning about a leaked tupdesc refcount when the COMMIT destroys the original resource owner, and then an error about the active resource owner not holding a matching refcount when the expression is destroyed. To fix, get rid of the need to have a shutdown callback at all, by instead caching a pointer to the relevant typcache entry. Those survive for the life of the backend, so we needn't worry about the pointer becoming stale. (For registered RECORD types, we can still cache a pointer to the tupdesc, knowing that it won't change for the life of the backend.) This mechanism has been in use in plpgsql and expandedrecord.c since commit 4b93f5799, and seems to work well. This change requires modifying the ExprEvalStep structs used by the relevant expression step types, which is slightly worrisome for back-patching. However, there seems no good reason for extensions to be familiar with the details of these particular sub-structs. Per report from Rohit Bhogate. Back-patch to v11 where within-DO-block COMMITs became a thing. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAV6ZkQRCVBh8qAY+SZiHnz+U+FqAGBBDaDTjF2yiKa2nJSLKg@mail.gmail.com
2021-04-13 19:37:07 +02:00
/* cached descriptor for composite type - filled at runtime */
ExprEvalRowtypeCache rowcache;
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
} nulltest_row;
/* for EEOP_PARAM_EXEC/EXTERN */
struct
{
int paramid; /* numeric ID for parameter */
Oid paramtype; /* OID of parameter's datatype */
} param;
Rearrange execution of PARAM_EXTERN Params for plpgsql's benefit. This patch does three interrelated things: * Create a new expression execution step type EEOP_PARAM_CALLBACK and add the infrastructure needed for add-on modules to generate that. As discussed, the best control mechanism for that seems to be to add another hook function to ParamListInfo, which will be called by ExecInitExpr if it's supplied and a PARAM_EXTERN Param is found. For stand-alone expressions, we add a new entry point to allow the ParamListInfo to be specified directly, since it can't be retrieved from the parent plan node's EState. * Redesign the API for the ParamListInfo paramFetch hook so that the ParamExternData array can be entirely virtual. This also lets us get rid of ParamListInfo.paramMask, instead leaving it to the paramFetch hook to decide which param IDs should be accessible or not. plpgsql_param_fetch was already doing the identical masking check, so having callers do it too seemed redundant. While I was at it, I added a "speculative" flag to paramFetch that the planner can specify as TRUE to avoid unwanted failures. This solves an ancient problem for plpgsql that it couldn't provide values of non-DTYPE_VAR variables to the planner for fear of triggering premature "record not assigned yet" or "field not found" errors during planning. * Rework plpgsql to get rid of the need for "unshared" parameter lists, by dint of turning the single ParamListInfo per estate into a nearly read-only data structure that doesn't instantiate any per-variable data. Instead, the paramFetch hook controls access to per-variable data and can make the right decisions on the fly, replacing the cases that we used to need multiple ParamListInfos for. This might perhaps have been a performance loss on its own, but by using a paramCompile hook we can bypass plpgsql_param_fetch entirely during normal query execution. (It's now only called when, eg, we copy the ParamListInfo into a cursor portal. copyParamList() or SerializeParamList() effectively instantiate the virtual parameter array as a simple physical array without a paramFetch hook, which is what we want in those cases.) This allows reverting most of commit 6c82d8d1f, though I kept the cosmetic code-consolidation aspects of that (eg the assign_simple_var function). Performance testing shows this to be at worst a break-even change, and it can provide wins ranging up to 20% in test cases involving accesses to fields of "record" variables. The fact that values of such variables can now be exposed to the planner might produce wins in some situations, too, but I've not pursued that angle. In passing, remove the "parent" pointer from the arguments to ExecInitExprRec and related functions, instead storing that pointer in a transient field in ExprState. The ParamListInfo pointer for a stand-alone expression is handled the same way; we'd otherwise have had to add yet another recursively-passed-down argument in expression compilation. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/32589.1513706441@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-12-21 18:57:41 +01:00
/* for EEOP_PARAM_CALLBACK */
struct
{
ExecEvalSubroutine paramfunc; /* add-on evaluation subroutine */
void *paramarg; /* private data for same */
int paramid; /* numeric ID for parameter */
Oid paramtype; /* OID of parameter's datatype */
} cparam;
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
/* for EEOP_CASE_TESTVAL/DOMAIN_TESTVAL */
struct
{
Datum *value; /* value to return */
bool *isnull;
} casetest;
/* for EEOP_MAKE_READONLY */
struct
{
Datum *value; /* value to coerce to read-only */
bool *isnull;
} make_readonly;
/* for EEOP_IOCOERCE */
struct
{
/* lookup and call info for source type's output function */
FmgrInfo *finfo_out;
FunctionCallInfo fcinfo_data_out;
/* lookup and call info for result type's input function */
FmgrInfo *finfo_in;
Revert "Add soft error handling to some expression nodes" This reverts commit 7fbc75b26ed8ec70c729c5e7f8233896c54c900f. Looks like the LLVM additions may not be totally correct.
2023-10-02 06:48:15 +02:00
FunctionCallInfo fcinfo_data_in;
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
} iocoerce;
Add back SQLValueFunction for SQL keywords This is equivalent to a revert of f193883 and fb32748, with the addition that the declaration of the SQLValueFunction node needs to gain a couple of node_attr for query jumbling. The performance impact of removing the function call inlining is proving to be too huge for some workloads where these are used. A worst-case test case of involving only simple SELECT queries with a SQL keyword is proving to lead to a reduction of 10% in TPS via pgbench and prepared queries on a high-end machine. None of the tests I ran back for this set of changes saw such a huge gap, but Alexander Lakhin and Andres Freund have found that this can be noticeable. Keeping the older performance would mean to do more inlining in the executor when using COERCE_SQL_SYNTAX for a function expression, similarly to what SQLValueFunction does. This requires more redesign work and there is little time until 16beta1 is released, so for now reverting the change is the best way forward, bringing back the previous performance. Bump catalog version. Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/b32bed1b-0746-9b20-1472-4bdc9ca66d52@gmail.com
2023-05-17 03:19:17 +02:00
/* for EEOP_SQLVALUEFUNCTION */
struct
{
SQLValueFunction *svf;
} sqlvaluefunction;
Code review for NextValueExpr expression node type. Add missing infrastructure for this node type, notably in ruleutils.c where its lack could demonstrably cause EXPLAIN to fail. Add outfuncs/readfuncs support. (outfuncs support is useful today for debugging purposes. The readfuncs support may never be needed, since at present it would only matter for parallel query and NextValueExpr should never appear in a parallelizable query; but it seems like a bad idea to have a primnode type that isn't fully supported here.) Teach planner infrastructure that NextValueExpr is a volatile, parallel-unsafe, non-leaky expression node with cost cpu_operator_cost. Given its limited scope of usage, there *might* be no live bug today from the lack of that knowledge, but it's certainly going to bite us on the rear someday. Teach pg_stat_statements about the new node type, too. While at it, also teach cost_qual_eval() that MinMaxExpr, SQLValueFunction, XmlExpr, and CoerceToDomain should be charged as cpu_operator_cost. Failing to do this for SQLValueFunction was an oversight in my commit 0bb51aa96. The others are longer-standing oversights, but no time like the present to fix them. (In principle, CoerceToDomain could have cost much higher than this, but it doesn't presently seem worth trying to examine the domain's constraints here.) Modify execExprInterp.c to execute NextValueExpr as an out-of-line function; it seems quite unlikely to me that it's worth insisting that it be inlined in all expression eval methods. Besides, providing the out-of-line function doesn't stop anyone from inlining if they want to. Adjust some places where NextValueExpr support had been inserted with the aid of a dartboard rather than keeping it in the same order as elsewhere. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/23862.1499981661@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-07-14 21:25:43 +02:00
/* for EEOP_NEXTVALUEEXPR */
Identity columns This is the SQL standard-conforming variant of PostgreSQL's serial columns. It fixes a few usability issues that serial columns have: - CREATE TABLE / LIKE copies default but refers to same sequence - cannot add/drop serialness with ALTER TABLE - dropping default does not drop sequence - need to grant separate privileges to sequence - other slight weirdnesses because serial is some kind of special macro Reviewed-by: Vitaly Burovoy <vitaly.burovoy@gmail.com>
2017-04-06 14:33:16 +02:00
struct
{
Oid seqid;
Oid seqtypid;
} nextvalueexpr;
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
/* for EEOP_ARRAYEXPR */
struct
{
Datum *elemvalues; /* element values get stored here */
bool *elemnulls;
int nelems; /* length of the above arrays */
Oid elemtype; /* array element type */
int16 elemlength; /* typlen of the array element type */
bool elembyval; /* is the element type pass-by-value? */
char elemalign; /* typalign of the element type */
bool multidims; /* is array expression multi-D? */
} arrayexpr;
/* for EEOP_ARRAYCOERCE */
struct
{
Support arrays over domains. Allowing arrays with a domain type as their element type was left un-done in the original domain patch, but not for any very good reason. This omission leads to such surprising results as array_agg() not working on a domain column, because the parser can't identify a suitable output type for the polymorphic aggregate. In order to fix this, first clean up the APIs of coerce_to_domain() and some internal functions in parse_coerce.c so that we consistently pass around a CoercionContext along with CoercionForm. Previously, we sometimes passed an "isExplicit" boolean flag instead, which is strictly less information; and coerce_to_domain() didn't even get that, but instead had to reverse-engineer isExplicit from CoercionForm. That's contrary to the documentation in primnodes.h that says that CoercionForm only affects display and not semantics. I don't think this change fixes any live bugs, but it makes things more consistent. The main reason for doing it though is that now build_coercion_expression() receives ccontext, which it needs in order to be able to recursively invoke coerce_to_target_type(). Next, reimplement ArrayCoerceExpr so that the node does not directly know any details of what has to be done to the individual array elements while performing the array coercion. Instead, the per-element processing is represented by a sub-expression whose input is a source array element and whose output is a target array element. This simplifies life in parse_coerce.c, because it can build that sub-expression by a recursive invocation of coerce_to_target_type(). The executor now handles the per-element processing as a compiled expression instead of hard-wired code. The main advantage of this is that we can use a single ArrayCoerceExpr to handle as many as three successive steps per element: base type conversion, typmod coercion, and domain constraint checking. The old code used two stacked ArrayCoerceExprs to handle type + typmod coercion, which was pretty inefficient, and adding yet another array deconstruction to do domain constraint checking seemed very unappetizing. In the case where we just need a single, very simple coercion function, doing this straightforwardly leads to a noticeable increase in the per-array-element runtime cost. Hence, add an additional shortcut evalfunc in execExprInterp.c that skips unnecessary overhead for that specific form of expression. The runtime speed of simple cases is within 1% or so of where it was before, while cases that previously required two levels of array processing are significantly faster. Finally, create an implicit array type for every domain type, as we do for base types, enums, etc. Everything except the array-coercion case seems to just work without further effort. Tom Lane, reviewed by Andrew Dunstan Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9852.1499791473@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-09-30 19:40:56 +02:00
ExprState *elemexprstate; /* null if no per-element work */
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
Oid resultelemtype; /* element type of result array */
struct ArrayMapState *amstate; /* workspace for array_map */
} arraycoerce;
/* for EEOP_ROW */
struct
{
TupleDesc tupdesc; /* descriptor for result tuples */
/* workspace for the values constituting the row: */
Datum *elemvalues;
bool *elemnulls;
} row;
/* for EEOP_ROWCOMPARE_STEP */
struct
{
/* lookup and call data for column comparison function */
FmgrInfo *finfo;
FunctionCallInfo fcinfo_data;
PGFunction fn_addr;
/* target for comparison resulting in NULL */
int jumpnull;
/* target for comparison yielding inequality */
int jumpdone;
} rowcompare_step;
/* for EEOP_ROWCOMPARE_FINAL */
struct
{
RowCompareType rctype;
} rowcompare_final;
/* for EEOP_MINMAX */
struct
{
/* workspace for argument values */
Datum *values;
bool *nulls;
int nelems;
/* is it GREATEST or LEAST? */
MinMaxOp op;
/* lookup and call data for comparison function */
FmgrInfo *finfo;
FunctionCallInfo fcinfo_data;
} minmax;
/* for EEOP_FIELDSELECT */
struct
{
AttrNumber fieldnum; /* field number to extract */
Oid resulttype; /* field's type */
Redesign the caching done by get_cached_rowtype(). Previously, get_cached_rowtype() cached a pointer to a reference-counted tuple descriptor from the typcache, relying on the ExprContextCallback mechanism to release the tupdesc refcount when the expression tree using the tupdesc was destroyed. This worked fine when it was designed, but the introduction of within-DO-block COMMITs broke it. The refcount is logged in a transaction-lifespan resource owner, but plpgsql won't destroy simple expressions made within the DO block (before its first commit) until the DO block is exited. That results in a warning about a leaked tupdesc refcount when the COMMIT destroys the original resource owner, and then an error about the active resource owner not holding a matching refcount when the expression is destroyed. To fix, get rid of the need to have a shutdown callback at all, by instead caching a pointer to the relevant typcache entry. Those survive for the life of the backend, so we needn't worry about the pointer becoming stale. (For registered RECORD types, we can still cache a pointer to the tupdesc, knowing that it won't change for the life of the backend.) This mechanism has been in use in plpgsql and expandedrecord.c since commit 4b93f5799, and seems to work well. This change requires modifying the ExprEvalStep structs used by the relevant expression step types, which is slightly worrisome for back-patching. However, there seems no good reason for extensions to be familiar with the details of these particular sub-structs. Per report from Rohit Bhogate. Back-patch to v11 where within-DO-block COMMITs became a thing. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAV6ZkQRCVBh8qAY+SZiHnz+U+FqAGBBDaDTjF2yiKa2nJSLKg@mail.gmail.com
2021-04-13 19:37:07 +02:00
/* cached descriptor for composite type - filled at runtime */
ExprEvalRowtypeCache rowcache;
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
} fieldselect;
/* for EEOP_FIELDSTORE_DEFORM / FIELDSTORE_FORM */
struct
{
/* original expression node */
FieldStore *fstore;
Redesign the caching done by get_cached_rowtype(). Previously, get_cached_rowtype() cached a pointer to a reference-counted tuple descriptor from the typcache, relying on the ExprContextCallback mechanism to release the tupdesc refcount when the expression tree using the tupdesc was destroyed. This worked fine when it was designed, but the introduction of within-DO-block COMMITs broke it. The refcount is logged in a transaction-lifespan resource owner, but plpgsql won't destroy simple expressions made within the DO block (before its first commit) until the DO block is exited. That results in a warning about a leaked tupdesc refcount when the COMMIT destroys the original resource owner, and then an error about the active resource owner not holding a matching refcount when the expression is destroyed. To fix, get rid of the need to have a shutdown callback at all, by instead caching a pointer to the relevant typcache entry. Those survive for the life of the backend, so we needn't worry about the pointer becoming stale. (For registered RECORD types, we can still cache a pointer to the tupdesc, knowing that it won't change for the life of the backend.) This mechanism has been in use in plpgsql and expandedrecord.c since commit 4b93f5799, and seems to work well. This change requires modifying the ExprEvalStep structs used by the relevant expression step types, which is slightly worrisome for back-patching. However, there seems no good reason for extensions to be familiar with the details of these particular sub-structs. Per report from Rohit Bhogate. Back-patch to v11 where within-DO-block COMMITs became a thing. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAV6ZkQRCVBh8qAY+SZiHnz+U+FqAGBBDaDTjF2yiKa2nJSLKg@mail.gmail.com
2021-04-13 19:37:07 +02:00
/* cached descriptor for composite type - filled at runtime */
/* note that a DEFORM and FORM pair share the same cache */
ExprEvalRowtypeCache *rowcache;
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
/* workspace for column values */
Datum *values;
bool *nulls;
int ncolumns;
} fieldstore;
Support subscripting of arbitrary types, not only arrays. This patch generalizes the subscripting infrastructure so that any data type can be subscripted, if it provides a handler function to define what that means. Traditional variable-length (varlena) arrays all use array_subscript_handler(), while the existing fixed-length types that support subscripting use raw_array_subscript_handler(). It's expected that other types that want to use subscripting notation will define their own handlers. (This patch provides no such new features, though; it only lays the foundation for them.) To do this, move the parser's semantic processing of subscripts (including coercion to whatever data type is required) into a method callback supplied by the handler. On the execution side, replace the ExecEvalSubscriptingRef* layer of functions with direct calls to callback-supplied execution routines. (Thus, essentially no new run-time overhead should be caused by this patch. Indeed, there is room to remove some overhead by supplying specialized execution routines. This patch does a little bit in that line, but more could be done.) Additional work is required here and there to remove formerly hard-wired assumptions about the result type, collation, etc of a SubscriptingRef expression node; and to remove assumptions that the subscript values must be integers. One useful side-effect of this is that we now have a less squishy mechanism for identifying whether a data type is a "true" array: instead of wiring in weird rules about typlen, we can look to see if pg_type.typsubscript == F_ARRAY_SUBSCRIPT_HANDLER. For this to be bulletproof, we have to forbid user-defined types from using that handler directly; but there seems no good reason for them to do so. This patch also removes assumptions that the number of subscripts is limited to MAXDIM (6), or indeed has any hard-wired limit. That limit still applies to types handled by array_subscript_handler or raw_array_subscript_handler, but to discourage other dependencies on this constant, I've moved it from c.h to utils/array.h. Dmitry Dolgov, reviewed at various times by Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov, Peter Eisentraut, Pavel Stehule Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVDuGBv=M0FqBYX8DPebS3F_0KQ6OVFobGJPM507_SZ_w@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVovR+XY4mfk-7oNk-rF91gH0PebnNfuUjuuDsyHjOcVA@mail.gmail.com
2020-12-09 18:40:37 +01:00
/* for EEOP_SBSREF_SUBSCRIPTS */
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
struct
{
Support subscripting of arbitrary types, not only arrays. This patch generalizes the subscripting infrastructure so that any data type can be subscripted, if it provides a handler function to define what that means. Traditional variable-length (varlena) arrays all use array_subscript_handler(), while the existing fixed-length types that support subscripting use raw_array_subscript_handler(). It's expected that other types that want to use subscripting notation will define their own handlers. (This patch provides no such new features, though; it only lays the foundation for them.) To do this, move the parser's semantic processing of subscripts (including coercion to whatever data type is required) into a method callback supplied by the handler. On the execution side, replace the ExecEvalSubscriptingRef* layer of functions with direct calls to callback-supplied execution routines. (Thus, essentially no new run-time overhead should be caused by this patch. Indeed, there is room to remove some overhead by supplying specialized execution routines. This patch does a little bit in that line, but more could be done.) Additional work is required here and there to remove formerly hard-wired assumptions about the result type, collation, etc of a SubscriptingRef expression node; and to remove assumptions that the subscript values must be integers. One useful side-effect of this is that we now have a less squishy mechanism for identifying whether a data type is a "true" array: instead of wiring in weird rules about typlen, we can look to see if pg_type.typsubscript == F_ARRAY_SUBSCRIPT_HANDLER. For this to be bulletproof, we have to forbid user-defined types from using that handler directly; but there seems no good reason for them to do so. This patch also removes assumptions that the number of subscripts is limited to MAXDIM (6), or indeed has any hard-wired limit. That limit still applies to types handled by array_subscript_handler or raw_array_subscript_handler, but to discourage other dependencies on this constant, I've moved it from c.h to utils/array.h. Dmitry Dolgov, reviewed at various times by Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov, Peter Eisentraut, Pavel Stehule Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVDuGBv=M0FqBYX8DPebS3F_0KQ6OVFobGJPM507_SZ_w@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVovR+XY4mfk-7oNk-rF91gH0PebnNfuUjuuDsyHjOcVA@mail.gmail.com
2020-12-09 18:40:37 +01:00
ExecEvalBoolSubroutine subscriptfunc; /* evaluation subroutine */
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
/* too big to have inline */
Renaming for new subscripting mechanism Over at patch https://commitfest.postgresql.org/21/1062/ Dmitry wants to introduce a more generic subscription mechanism, which allows subscripting not only arrays but also other object types such as JSONB. That functionality is introduced in a largish invasive patch, out of which this internal renaming patch was extracted. Author: Dmitry Dolgov Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcUK4EqPAu7XRRO5CCjMwhz5zvg+rfWuLzVoxp_5sKS6=w@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-01 16:50:32 +01:00
struct SubscriptingRefState *state;
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
int jumpdone; /* jump here on null */
Renaming for new subscripting mechanism Over at patch https://commitfest.postgresql.org/21/1062/ Dmitry wants to introduce a more generic subscription mechanism, which allows subscripting not only arrays but also other object types such as JSONB. That functionality is introduced in a largish invasive patch, out of which this internal renaming patch was extracted. Author: Dmitry Dolgov Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcUK4EqPAu7XRRO5CCjMwhz5zvg+rfWuLzVoxp_5sKS6=w@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-01 16:50:32 +01:00
} sbsref_subscript;
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
Renaming for new subscripting mechanism Over at patch https://commitfest.postgresql.org/21/1062/ Dmitry wants to introduce a more generic subscription mechanism, which allows subscripting not only arrays but also other object types such as JSONB. That functionality is introduced in a largish invasive patch, out of which this internal renaming patch was extracted. Author: Dmitry Dolgov Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcUK4EqPAu7XRRO5CCjMwhz5zvg+rfWuLzVoxp_5sKS6=w@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-01 16:50:32 +01:00
/* for EEOP_SBSREF_OLD / ASSIGN / FETCH */
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
struct
{
Support subscripting of arbitrary types, not only arrays. This patch generalizes the subscripting infrastructure so that any data type can be subscripted, if it provides a handler function to define what that means. Traditional variable-length (varlena) arrays all use array_subscript_handler(), while the existing fixed-length types that support subscripting use raw_array_subscript_handler(). It's expected that other types that want to use subscripting notation will define their own handlers. (This patch provides no such new features, though; it only lays the foundation for them.) To do this, move the parser's semantic processing of subscripts (including coercion to whatever data type is required) into a method callback supplied by the handler. On the execution side, replace the ExecEvalSubscriptingRef* layer of functions with direct calls to callback-supplied execution routines. (Thus, essentially no new run-time overhead should be caused by this patch. Indeed, there is room to remove some overhead by supplying specialized execution routines. This patch does a little bit in that line, but more could be done.) Additional work is required here and there to remove formerly hard-wired assumptions about the result type, collation, etc of a SubscriptingRef expression node; and to remove assumptions that the subscript values must be integers. One useful side-effect of this is that we now have a less squishy mechanism for identifying whether a data type is a "true" array: instead of wiring in weird rules about typlen, we can look to see if pg_type.typsubscript == F_ARRAY_SUBSCRIPT_HANDLER. For this to be bulletproof, we have to forbid user-defined types from using that handler directly; but there seems no good reason for them to do so. This patch also removes assumptions that the number of subscripts is limited to MAXDIM (6), or indeed has any hard-wired limit. That limit still applies to types handled by array_subscript_handler or raw_array_subscript_handler, but to discourage other dependencies on this constant, I've moved it from c.h to utils/array.h. Dmitry Dolgov, reviewed at various times by Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov, Peter Eisentraut, Pavel Stehule Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVDuGBv=M0FqBYX8DPebS3F_0KQ6OVFobGJPM507_SZ_w@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVovR+XY4mfk-7oNk-rF91gH0PebnNfuUjuuDsyHjOcVA@mail.gmail.com
2020-12-09 18:40:37 +01:00
ExecEvalSubroutine subscriptfunc; /* evaluation subroutine */
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
/* too big to have inline */
Renaming for new subscripting mechanism Over at patch https://commitfest.postgresql.org/21/1062/ Dmitry wants to introduce a more generic subscription mechanism, which allows subscripting not only arrays but also other object types such as JSONB. That functionality is introduced in a largish invasive patch, out of which this internal renaming patch was extracted. Author: Dmitry Dolgov Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcUK4EqPAu7XRRO5CCjMwhz5zvg+rfWuLzVoxp_5sKS6=w@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-01 16:50:32 +01:00
struct SubscriptingRefState *state;
} sbsref;
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
/* for EEOP_DOMAIN_NOTNULL / DOMAIN_CHECK */
struct
{
/* name of constraint */
char *constraintname;
/* where the result of a CHECK constraint will be stored */
Datum *checkvalue;
bool *checknull;
/* OID of domain type */
Oid resulttype;
Add soft error handling to some expression nodes This adjusts the code for CoerceViaIO and CoerceToDomain expression nodes to handle errors softly. For CoerceViaIo, this adds a new ExprEvalStep opcode EEOP_IOCOERCE_SAFE, which is implemented in the new accompanying function ExecEvalCoerceViaIOSafe(). The only difference from EEOP_IOCOERCE's inline implementation is that the input function receives an ErrorSaveContext via the function's FunctionCallInfo.context, which it can use to handle errors softly. For CoerceToDomain, this simply entails replacing the ereport() in ExecEvalConstraintNotNull() and ExecEvalConstraintCheck() by errsave() passing it the ErrorSaveContext passed in the expression's ExprEvalStep. In both cases, the ErrorSaveContext to be used is passed by setting ExprState.escontext to point to it before calling ExecInitExprRec() on the expression tree whose errors are to be handled softly. Note that there's no functional change as of this commit as no call site of ExecInitExprRec() has been changed. This is intended for implementing new SQL/JSON expression nodes in future commits. Extracted from a much larger patch to add SQL/JSON query functions. Author: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> Author: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> Author: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> Author: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> Author: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Reviewers have included (in no particular order) Andres Freund, Alexander Korotkov, Pavel Stehule, Andrew Alsup, Erik Rijkers, Zihong Yu, Himanshu Upadhyaya, Daniel Gustafsson, Justin Pryzby, Álvaro Herrera, Jian He, Peter Eisentraut Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd0bb935-0158-78a7-08b5-904886deac4b@postgrespro.ru Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d%40postgresql.org Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqHROpf9e644D8BRqYvaAPmgBZVup-xKMDPk-nd4EpgzHw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqE4XTdfb1nW=Ojoy_tQSRhYt-q_kb6i5d4xcKyrLC1Nbg@mail.gmail.com
2024-01-24 05:35:22 +01:00
ErrorSaveContext *escontext;
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
} domaincheck;
/* for EEOP_CONVERT_ROWTYPE */
struct
{
Redesign the caching done by get_cached_rowtype(). Previously, get_cached_rowtype() cached a pointer to a reference-counted tuple descriptor from the typcache, relying on the ExprContextCallback mechanism to release the tupdesc refcount when the expression tree using the tupdesc was destroyed. This worked fine when it was designed, but the introduction of within-DO-block COMMITs broke it. The refcount is logged in a transaction-lifespan resource owner, but plpgsql won't destroy simple expressions made within the DO block (before its first commit) until the DO block is exited. That results in a warning about a leaked tupdesc refcount when the COMMIT destroys the original resource owner, and then an error about the active resource owner not holding a matching refcount when the expression is destroyed. To fix, get rid of the need to have a shutdown callback at all, by instead caching a pointer to the relevant typcache entry. Those survive for the life of the backend, so we needn't worry about the pointer becoming stale. (For registered RECORD types, we can still cache a pointer to the tupdesc, knowing that it won't change for the life of the backend.) This mechanism has been in use in plpgsql and expandedrecord.c since commit 4b93f5799, and seems to work well. This change requires modifying the ExprEvalStep structs used by the relevant expression step types, which is slightly worrisome for back-patching. However, there seems no good reason for extensions to be familiar with the details of these particular sub-structs. Per report from Rohit Bhogate. Back-patch to v11 where within-DO-block COMMITs became a thing. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAV6ZkQRCVBh8qAY+SZiHnz+U+FqAGBBDaDTjF2yiKa2nJSLKg@mail.gmail.com
2021-04-13 19:37:07 +02:00
Oid inputtype; /* input composite type */
Oid outputtype; /* output composite type */
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
/* these three fields are filled at runtime: */
Redesign the caching done by get_cached_rowtype(). Previously, get_cached_rowtype() cached a pointer to a reference-counted tuple descriptor from the typcache, relying on the ExprContextCallback mechanism to release the tupdesc refcount when the expression tree using the tupdesc was destroyed. This worked fine when it was designed, but the introduction of within-DO-block COMMITs broke it. The refcount is logged in a transaction-lifespan resource owner, but plpgsql won't destroy simple expressions made within the DO block (before its first commit) until the DO block is exited. That results in a warning about a leaked tupdesc refcount when the COMMIT destroys the original resource owner, and then an error about the active resource owner not holding a matching refcount when the expression is destroyed. To fix, get rid of the need to have a shutdown callback at all, by instead caching a pointer to the relevant typcache entry. Those survive for the life of the backend, so we needn't worry about the pointer becoming stale. (For registered RECORD types, we can still cache a pointer to the tupdesc, knowing that it won't change for the life of the backend.) This mechanism has been in use in plpgsql and expandedrecord.c since commit 4b93f5799, and seems to work well. This change requires modifying the ExprEvalStep structs used by the relevant expression step types, which is slightly worrisome for back-patching. However, there seems no good reason for extensions to be familiar with the details of these particular sub-structs. Per report from Rohit Bhogate. Back-patch to v11 where within-DO-block COMMITs became a thing. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAV6ZkQRCVBh8qAY+SZiHnz+U+FqAGBBDaDTjF2yiKa2nJSLKg@mail.gmail.com
2021-04-13 19:37:07 +02:00
ExprEvalRowtypeCache *incache; /* cache for input type */
ExprEvalRowtypeCache *outcache; /* cache for output type */
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
TupleConversionMap *map; /* column mapping */
} convert_rowtype;
/* for EEOP_SCALARARRAYOP */
struct
{
/* element_type/typlen/typbyval/typalign are filled at runtime */
Oid element_type; /* InvalidOid if not yet filled */
bool useOr; /* use OR or AND semantics? */
int16 typlen; /* array element type storage info */
bool typbyval;
char typalign;
FmgrInfo *finfo; /* function's lookup data */
FunctionCallInfo fcinfo_data; /* arguments etc */
/* faster to access without additional indirection: */
PGFunction fn_addr; /* actual call address */
} scalararrayop;
Speedup ScalarArrayOpExpr evaluation ScalarArrayOpExprs with "useOr=true" and a set of Consts on the righthand side have traditionally been evaluated by using a linear search over the array. When these arrays contain large numbers of elements then this linear search could become a significant part of execution time. Here we add a new method of evaluating ScalarArrayOpExpr expressions to allow them to be evaluated by first building a hash table containing each element, then on subsequent evaluations, we just probe that hash table to determine if there is a match. The planner is in charge of determining when this optimization is possible and it enables it by setting hashfuncid in the ScalarArrayOpExpr. The executor will only perform the hash table evaluation when the hashfuncid is set. This means that not all cases are optimized. For example CHECK constraints containing an IN clause won't go through the planner, so won't get the hashfuncid set. We could maybe do something about that at some later date. The reason we're not doing it now is from fear that we may slow down cases where the expression is evaluated only once. Those cases can be common, for example, a single row INSERT to a table with a CHECK constraint containing an IN clause. In the planner, we enable this when there are suitable hash functions for the ScalarArrayOpExpr's operator and only when there is at least MIN_ARRAY_SIZE_FOR_HASHED_SAOP elements in the array. The threshold is currently set to 9. Author: James Coleman, David Rowley Reviewed-by: David Rowley, Tomas Vondra, Heikki Linnakangas Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAaqYe8x62+=wn0zvNKCj55tPpg-JBHzhZFFc6ANovdqFw7-dA@mail.gmail.com
2021-04-08 13:51:22 +02:00
/* for EEOP_HASHED_SCALARARRAYOP */
struct
{
bool has_nulls;
Use a hash table to speed up NOT IN(values) Similar to 50e17ad28, which allowed hash tables to be used for IN clauses with a set of constants, here we add the same feature for NOT IN clauses. NOT IN evaluates the same as: WHERE a <> v1 AND a <> v2 AND a <> v3. Obviously, if we're using a hash table we must be exactly equivalent to that and return the same result taking into account that either side of the condition could contain a NULL. This requires a little bit of special handling to make work with the hash table version. When processing NOT IN, the ScalarArrayOpExpr's operator will be the <> operator. To be able to build and lookup a hash table we must use the <>'s negator operator. The planner checks if that exists and is hashable and sets the relevant fields in ScalarArrayOpExpr to instruct the executor to use hashing. Author: David Rowley, James Coleman Reviewed-by: James Coleman, Zhihong Yu Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvoF1mum_FRk6D621edcB6KSHBi2+GAgWmioj5AhOu2vwQ@mail.gmail.com
2021-07-07 06:29:17 +02:00
bool inclause; /* true for IN and false for NOT IN */
Speedup ScalarArrayOpExpr evaluation ScalarArrayOpExprs with "useOr=true" and a set of Consts on the righthand side have traditionally been evaluated by using a linear search over the array. When these arrays contain large numbers of elements then this linear search could become a significant part of execution time. Here we add a new method of evaluating ScalarArrayOpExpr expressions to allow them to be evaluated by first building a hash table containing each element, then on subsequent evaluations, we just probe that hash table to determine if there is a match. The planner is in charge of determining when this optimization is possible and it enables it by setting hashfuncid in the ScalarArrayOpExpr. The executor will only perform the hash table evaluation when the hashfuncid is set. This means that not all cases are optimized. For example CHECK constraints containing an IN clause won't go through the planner, so won't get the hashfuncid set. We could maybe do something about that at some later date. The reason we're not doing it now is from fear that we may slow down cases where the expression is evaluated only once. Those cases can be common, for example, a single row INSERT to a table with a CHECK constraint containing an IN clause. In the planner, we enable this when there are suitable hash functions for the ScalarArrayOpExpr's operator and only when there is at least MIN_ARRAY_SIZE_FOR_HASHED_SAOP elements in the array. The threshold is currently set to 9. Author: James Coleman, David Rowley Reviewed-by: David Rowley, Tomas Vondra, Heikki Linnakangas Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAaqYe8x62+=wn0zvNKCj55tPpg-JBHzhZFFc6ANovdqFw7-dA@mail.gmail.com
2021-04-08 13:51:22 +02:00
struct ScalarArrayOpExprHashTable *elements_tab;
FmgrInfo *finfo; /* function's lookup data */
FunctionCallInfo fcinfo_data; /* arguments etc */
Remove size increase in ExprEvalStep caused by hashed saops 50e17ad28 increased the size of ExprEvalStep from 64 bytes up to 88 bytes. Lots of effort was spent during the development of the current expression evaluation code to make an instance of this struct as small as possible. Making this struct larger than needed reduces CPU cache efficiency during expression evaluation which causes noticeable slowdowns during query execution. In order to reduce the size of the struct, here we remove the fn_addr field. The values from this field can be obtained via fcinfo, just with some extra pointer dereferencing. The extra indirection does not seem to cause any noticeable slowdowns. Various other fields have been moved into the ScalarArrayOpExprHashTable struct. These fields are only used when the ScalarArrayOpExprHashTable pointer has already been dereferenced, so no additional pointer dereferences occur for these. Here we also make hash_fcinfo_data the last field in ScalarArrayOpExprHashTable so that we can avoid a further pointer dereference to get the FunctionCallInfoBaseData. This also saves a call to palloc(). 50e17ad28 was added in 14, but it's too late to adjust the size of the ExprEvalStep in that version, so here we just backpatch to 15, which is currently in beta. Author: Andres Freund, David Rowley Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Backpatch-through: 15
2022-07-06 09:40:32 +02:00
ScalarArrayOpExpr *saop;
Speedup ScalarArrayOpExpr evaluation ScalarArrayOpExprs with "useOr=true" and a set of Consts on the righthand side have traditionally been evaluated by using a linear search over the array. When these arrays contain large numbers of elements then this linear search could become a significant part of execution time. Here we add a new method of evaluating ScalarArrayOpExpr expressions to allow them to be evaluated by first building a hash table containing each element, then on subsequent evaluations, we just probe that hash table to determine if there is a match. The planner is in charge of determining when this optimization is possible and it enables it by setting hashfuncid in the ScalarArrayOpExpr. The executor will only perform the hash table evaluation when the hashfuncid is set. This means that not all cases are optimized. For example CHECK constraints containing an IN clause won't go through the planner, so won't get the hashfuncid set. We could maybe do something about that at some later date. The reason we're not doing it now is from fear that we may slow down cases where the expression is evaluated only once. Those cases can be common, for example, a single row INSERT to a table with a CHECK constraint containing an IN clause. In the planner, we enable this when there are suitable hash functions for the ScalarArrayOpExpr's operator and only when there is at least MIN_ARRAY_SIZE_FOR_HASHED_SAOP elements in the array. The threshold is currently set to 9. Author: James Coleman, David Rowley Reviewed-by: David Rowley, Tomas Vondra, Heikki Linnakangas Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAaqYe8x62+=wn0zvNKCj55tPpg-JBHzhZFFc6ANovdqFw7-dA@mail.gmail.com
2021-04-08 13:51:22 +02:00
} hashedscalararrayop;
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
/* for EEOP_XMLEXPR */
struct
{
XmlExpr *xexpr; /* original expression node */
/* workspace for evaluating named args, if any */
Datum *named_argvalue;
bool *named_argnull;
/* workspace for evaluating unnamed args, if any */
Datum *argvalue;
bool *argnull;
} xmlexpr;
SQL/JSON: add standard JSON constructor functions This commit introduces the SQL/JSON standard-conforming constructors for JSON types: JSON_ARRAY() JSON_ARRAYAGG() JSON_OBJECT() JSON_OBJECTAGG() Most of the functionality was already present in PostgreSQL-specific functions, but these include some new functionality such as the ability to skip or include NULL values, and to allow duplicate keys or throw error when they are found, as well as the standard specified syntax to specify output type and format. Author: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> Author: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> Author: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> Author: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Reviewers have included (in no particular order) Andres Freund, Alexander Korotkov, Pavel Stehule, Andrew Alsup, Erik Rijkers, Zihong Yu, Himanshu Upadhyaya, Daniel Gustafsson, Justin Pryzby. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAF4Au4w2x-5LTnN_bxky-mq4=WOqsGsxSpENCzHRAzSnEd8+WQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd0bb935-0158-78a7-08b5-904886deac4b@postgrespro.ru Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d%40postgresql.org
2023-03-29 12:11:36 +02:00
/* for EEOP_JSON_CONSTRUCTOR */
struct
{
struct JsonConstructorExprState *jcstate;
} json_constructor;
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
/* for EEOP_AGGREF */
struct
{
Move per-agg and per-trans duplicate finding to the planner. This has the advantage that the cost estimates for aggregates can count the number of calls to transition and final functions correctly. Bump catalog version, because views can contain Aggrefs. Reviewed-by: Andres Freund Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/b2e3536b-1dbc-8303-c97e-89cb0b4a9a48%40iki.fi
2020-11-24 09:45:00 +01:00
int aggno;
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
} aggref;
/* for EEOP_GROUPING_FUNC */
struct
{
List *clauses; /* integer list of column numbers */
} grouping_func;
/* for EEOP_WINDOW_FUNC */
struct
{
Fix inconsistencies and typos in the tree, take 9 This addresses more issues with code comments, variable names and unreferenced variables. Author: Alexander Lakhin Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/7ab243e0-116d-3e44-d120-76b3df7abefd@gmail.com
2019-08-05 05:14:58 +02:00
/* out-of-line state, modified by nodeWindowAgg.c */
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
WindowFuncExprState *wfstate;
} window_func;
/* for EEOP_SUBPLAN */
struct
{
/* out-of-line state, created by nodeSubplan.c */
SubPlanState *sstate;
} subplan;
Expression evaluation based aggregate transition invocation. Previously aggregate transition and combination functions were invoked by special case code in nodeAgg.c, evaluating input and filters separately using the expression evaluation machinery. That turns out to not be great for performance for several reasons: - repeated expression evaluations have some cost - the transition functions invocations are poorly predicted, as commonly there are multiple aggregates in a query, resulting in the same call-stack invoking different functions. - filter and input computation had to be done separately - the special case code made it hard to implement JITing of the whole transition function invocation Address this by building one large expression that computes input, evaluates filters, and invokes transition functions. This leads to moderate speedups in queries bottlenecked by aggregate computations, and enables large speedups for similar cases once JITing is done. There's potential for further improvement: - It'd be nice if we could simplify the somewhat expensive aggstate->all_pergroups lookups. - right now there's still an advance_transition_function invocation in nodeAgg.c, leading to some code duplication. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170901064131.tazjxwus3k2w3ybh@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-01-09 22:25:38 +01:00
/* for EEOP_AGG_*DESERIALIZE */
struct
{
FunctionCallInfo fcinfo_data;
int jumpnull;
} agg_deserialize;
Change function call information to be variable length. Before this change FunctionCallInfoData, the struct arguments etc for V1 function calls are stored in, always had space for FUNC_MAX_ARGS/100 arguments, storing datums and their nullness in two arrays. For nearly every function call 100 arguments is far more than needed, therefore wasting memory. Arg and argnull being two separate arrays also guarantees that to access a single argument, two cachelines have to be touched. Change the layout so there's a single variable-length array with pairs of value / isnull. That drastically reduces memory consumption for most function calls (on x86-64 a two argument function now uses 64bytes, previously 936 bytes), and makes it very likely that argument value and its nullness are on the same cacheline. Arguments are stored in a new NullableDatum struct, which, due to padding, needs more memory per argument than before. But as usually far fewer arguments are stored, and individual arguments are cheaper to access, that's still a clear win. It's likely that there's other places where conversion to NullableDatum arrays would make sense, e.g. TupleTableSlots, but that's for another commit. Because the function call information is now variable-length allocations have to take the number of arguments into account. For heap allocations that can be done with SizeForFunctionCallInfoData(), for on-stack allocations there's a new LOCAL_FCINFO(name, nargs) macro that helps to allocate an appropriately sized and aligned variable. Some places with stack allocation function call information don't know the number of arguments at compile time, and currently variably sized stack allocations aren't allowed in postgres. Therefore allow for FUNC_MAX_ARGS space in these cases. They're not that common, so for now that seems acceptable. Because of the need to allocate FunctionCallInfo of the appropriate size, older extensions may need to update their code. To avoid subtle breakages, the FunctionCallInfoData struct has been renamed to FunctionCallInfoBaseData. Most code only references FunctionCallInfo, so that shouldn't cause much collateral damage. This change is also a prerequisite for more efficient expression JIT compilation (by allocating the function call information on the stack, allowing LLVM to optimize it away); previously the size of the call information caused problems inside LLVM's optimizer. Author: Andres Freund Reviewed-By: Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180605172952.x34m5uz6ju6enaem@alap3.anarazel.de
2019-01-26 23:17:52 +01:00
/* for EEOP_AGG_STRICT_INPUT_CHECK_NULLS / STRICT_INPUT_CHECK_ARGS */
struct
{
/*
* For EEOP_AGG_STRICT_INPUT_CHECK_ARGS args contains pointers to
* the NullableDatums that need to be checked for NULLs.
*
* For EEOP_AGG_STRICT_INPUT_CHECK_NULLS nulls contains pointers
* to booleans that need to be checked for NULLs.
*
* Both cases currently need to exist because sometimes the
* to-be-checked nulls are in TupleTableSlot.isnull array, and
* sometimes in FunctionCallInfoBaseData.args[i].isnull.
*/
NullableDatum *args;
Expression evaluation based aggregate transition invocation. Previously aggregate transition and combination functions were invoked by special case code in nodeAgg.c, evaluating input and filters separately using the expression evaluation machinery. That turns out to not be great for performance for several reasons: - repeated expression evaluations have some cost - the transition functions invocations are poorly predicted, as commonly there are multiple aggregates in a query, resulting in the same call-stack invoking different functions. - filter and input computation had to be done separately - the special case code made it hard to implement JITing of the whole transition function invocation Address this by building one large expression that computes input, evaluates filters, and invokes transition functions. This leads to moderate speedups in queries bottlenecked by aggregate computations, and enables large speedups for similar cases once JITing is done. There's potential for further improvement: - It'd be nice if we could simplify the somewhat expensive aggstate->all_pergroups lookups. - right now there's still an advance_transition_function invocation in nodeAgg.c, leading to some code duplication. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170901064131.tazjxwus3k2w3ybh@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-01-09 22:25:38 +01:00
bool *nulls;
int nargs;
int jumpnull;
} agg_strict_input_check;
Extend ExecBuildAggTrans() to support a NULL pointer check. Optionally push a step to check for a NULL pointer to the pergroup state. This will be important for disk-based hash aggregation in combination with grouping sets. When memory limits are reached, a given tuple may find its per-group state for some grouping sets but not others. For the former, it advances the per-group state as normal; for the latter, it skips evaluation and the calling code will have to spill the tuple and reprocess it in a later batch. Add the NULL check as a separate expression step because in some common cases it's not needed. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200221202212.ssb2qpmdgrnx52sj%40alap3.anarazel.de
2020-03-05 02:20:20 +01:00
/* for EEOP_AGG_PLAIN_PERGROUP_NULLCHECK */
struct
{
int setoff;
int jumpnull;
} agg_plain_pergroup_nullcheck;
Improve performance of ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggreagtes have, since implemented in Postgres, been executed by always performing a sort in nodeAgg.c to sort the tuples in the current group into the correct order before calling the transition function on the sorted tuples. This was not great as often there might be an index that could have provided pre-sorted input and allowed the transition functions to be called as the rows come in, rather than having to store them in a tuplestore in order to sort them once all the tuples for the group have arrived. Here we change the planner so it requests a path with a sort order which supports the most amount of ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregate functions and add new code to the executor to allow it to support the processing of ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates where the tuples are already sorted in the correct order. Since there can be many ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates in any given query level, it's very possible that we can't find an order that suits all of these aggregates. The sort order that the planner chooses is simply the one that suits the most aggregate functions. We take the most strictly sorted variation of each order and see how many aggregate functions can use that, then we try again with the order of the remaining aggregates to see if another order would suit more aggregate functions. For example: SELECT agg(a ORDER BY a),agg2(a ORDER BY a,b) ... would request the sort order to be {a, b} because {a} is a subset of the sort order of {a,b}, but; SELECT agg(a ORDER BY a),agg2(a ORDER BY c) ... would just pick a plan ordered by {a} (we give precedence to aggregates which are earlier in the targetlist). SELECT agg(a ORDER BY a),agg2(a ORDER BY b),agg3(a ORDER BY b) ... would choose to order by {b} since two aggregates suit that vs just one that requires input ordered by {a}. Author: David Rowley Reviewed-by: Ronan Dunklau, James Coleman, Ranier Vilela, Richard Guo, Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvpHzfo92%3DR4W0%2BxVua3BUYCKMckWAmo-2t_KiXN-wYH%3Dw%40mail.gmail.com
2022-08-02 13:11:45 +02:00
/* for EEOP_AGG_PRESORTED_DISTINCT_{SINGLE,MULTI} */
struct
{
AggStatePerTrans pertrans;
ExprContext *aggcontext;
int jumpdistinct;
} agg_presorted_distinctcheck;
expression eval: Reduce number of steps for agg transition invocations. Do so by combining the various steps that are part of aggregate transition function invocation into one larger step. As some of the current steps are only necessary for some aggregates, have one variant of the aggregate transition step for each possible combination. To avoid further manual copies of code in the different transition step implementations, move most of the code into helper functions marked as "always inline". The benefit of this change is an increase in performance when aggregating lots of rows. This comes in part due to the reduced number of indirect jumps due to the reduced number of steps, and in part by reducing redundant setup code across steps. This mainly benefits interpreted execution, but the code generated by JIT is also improved a bit. As a nice side-effect it also ends up making the code a bit simpler. A small additional optimization is removing the need to set aggstate->curaggcontext before calling ExecAggInitGroup, choosing to instead passign curaggcontext as an argument. It was, in contrast to other aggregate related functions, only needed to fetch a memory context to copy the transition value into. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20191023163849.sosqbfs5yenocez3@alap3.anarazel.de https://postgr.es/m/5c371df7cee903e8cd4c685f90c6c72086d3a2dc.camel@j-davis.com
2020-02-24 23:39:22 +01:00
/* for EEOP_AGG_PLAIN_TRANS_[INIT_][STRICT_]{BYVAL,BYREF} */
/* for EEOP_AGG_ORDERED_TRANS_{DATUM,TUPLE} */
Expression evaluation based aggregate transition invocation. Previously aggregate transition and combination functions were invoked by special case code in nodeAgg.c, evaluating input and filters separately using the expression evaluation machinery. That turns out to not be great for performance for several reasons: - repeated expression evaluations have some cost - the transition functions invocations are poorly predicted, as commonly there are multiple aggregates in a query, resulting in the same call-stack invoking different functions. - filter and input computation had to be done separately - the special case code made it hard to implement JITing of the whole transition function invocation Address this by building one large expression that computes input, evaluates filters, and invokes transition functions. This leads to moderate speedups in queries bottlenecked by aggregate computations, and enables large speedups for similar cases once JITing is done. There's potential for further improvement: - It'd be nice if we could simplify the somewhat expensive aggstate->all_pergroups lookups. - right now there's still an advance_transition_function invocation in nodeAgg.c, leading to some code duplication. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170901064131.tazjxwus3k2w3ybh@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-01-09 22:25:38 +01:00
struct
{
AggStatePerTrans pertrans;
ExprContext *aggcontext;
int setno;
int transno;
int setoff;
} agg_trans;
SQL/JSON: add standard JSON constructor functions This commit introduces the SQL/JSON standard-conforming constructors for JSON types: JSON_ARRAY() JSON_ARRAYAGG() JSON_OBJECT() JSON_OBJECTAGG() Most of the functionality was already present in PostgreSQL-specific functions, but these include some new functionality such as the ability to skip or include NULL values, and to allow duplicate keys or throw error when they are found, as well as the standard specified syntax to specify output type and format. Author: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> Author: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> Author: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> Author: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Reviewers have included (in no particular order) Andres Freund, Alexander Korotkov, Pavel Stehule, Andrew Alsup, Erik Rijkers, Zihong Yu, Himanshu Upadhyaya, Daniel Gustafsson, Justin Pryzby. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAF4Au4w2x-5LTnN_bxky-mq4=WOqsGsxSpENCzHRAzSnEd8+WQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd0bb935-0158-78a7-08b5-904886deac4b@postgrespro.ru Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d%40postgresql.org
2023-03-29 12:11:36 +02:00
SQL/JSON: support the IS JSON predicate This patch introduces the SQL standard IS JSON predicate. It operates on text and bytea values representing JSON, as well as on the json and jsonb types. Each test has IS and IS NOT variants and supports a WITH UNIQUE KEYS flag. The tests are: IS JSON [VALUE] IS JSON ARRAY IS JSON OBJECT IS JSON SCALAR These should be self-explanatory. The WITH UNIQUE KEYS flag makes these return false when duplicate keys exist in any object within the value, not necessarily directly contained in the outermost object. Author: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> Author: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> Author: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> Author: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Author: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> Reviewers have included (in no particular order) Andres Freund, Alexander Korotkov, Pavel Stehule, Andrew Alsup, Erik Rijkers, Zihong Yu, Himanshu Upadhyaya, Daniel Gustafsson, Justin Pryzby. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAF4Au4w2x-5LTnN_bxky-mq4=WOqsGsxSpENCzHRAzSnEd8+WQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd0bb935-0158-78a7-08b5-904886deac4b@postgrespro.ru Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d%40postgresql.org
2023-03-31 22:34:04 +02:00
/* for EEOP_IS_JSON */
struct
{
JsonIsPredicate *pred; /* original expression node */
} is_json;
Add SQL/JSON query functions This introduces the following SQL/JSON functions for querying JSON data using jsonpath expressions: JSON_EXISTS(), which can be used to apply a jsonpath expression to a JSON value to check if it yields any values. JSON_QUERY(), which can be used to to apply a jsonpath expression to a JSON value to get a JSON object, an array, or a string. There are various options to control whether multi-value result uses array wrappers and whether the singleton scalar strings are quoted or not. JSON_VALUE(), which can be used to apply a jsonpath expression to a JSON value to return a single scalar value, producing an error if it multiple values are matched. Both JSON_VALUE() and JSON_QUERY() functions have options for handling EMPTY and ERROR conditions, which can be used to specify the behavior when no values are matched and when an error occurs during jsonpath evaluation, respectively. Author: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> Author: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> Author: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> Author: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> Author: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Author: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> Author: Jian He <jian.universality@gmail.com> Reviewers have included (in no particular order): Andres Freund, Alexander Korotkov, Pavel Stehule, Andrew Alsup, Erik Rijkers, Zihong Yu, Himanshu Upadhyaya, Daniel Gustafsson, Justin Pryzby, Álvaro Herrera, Jian He, Anton A. Melnikov, Nikita Malakhov, Peter Eisentraut, Tomas Vondra Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd0bb935-0158-78a7-08b5-904886deac4b@postgrespro.ru Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d%40postgresql.org Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqHROpf9e644D8BRqYvaAPmgBZVup-xKMDPk-nd4EpgzHw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqE4XTdfb1nW=Ojoy_tQSRhYt-q_kb6i5d4xcKyrLC1Nbg@mail.gmail.com
2024-03-21 09:06:27 +01:00
/* for EEOP_JSONEXPR_PATH */
struct
{
struct JsonExprState *jsestate;
} jsonexpr;
/* for EEOP_JSONEXPR_COERCION */
struct
{
Oid targettype;
int32 targettypmod;
void *json_populate_type_cache;
ErrorSaveContext *escontext;
} jsonexpr_coercion;
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
} d;
} ExprEvalStep;
Add static assertion ensuring sizeof(ExprEvalStep) <= 64 bytes This was previously only documented in a comment. Given the size of the struct, it's not hard to miss that comment. As evidenced by the commits leading up to fe3caa14393, 67b26703b41. It's possible, but not likely, that we might have to weaken these assertions on a less commonly used architecture. Author: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/295606.1677101684@sss.pgh.pa.us
2023-02-22 23:27:56 +01:00
/* Enforce the size rule given in the comment above */
StaticAssertDecl(sizeof(ExprEvalStep) <= 64,
"size of ExprEvalStep exceeds 64 bytes");
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
Renaming for new subscripting mechanism Over at patch https://commitfest.postgresql.org/21/1062/ Dmitry wants to introduce a more generic subscription mechanism, which allows subscripting not only arrays but also other object types such as JSONB. That functionality is introduced in a largish invasive patch, out of which this internal renaming patch was extracted. Author: Dmitry Dolgov Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcUK4EqPAu7XRRO5CCjMwhz5zvg+rfWuLzVoxp_5sKS6=w@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-01 16:50:32 +01:00
/* Non-inline data for container operations */
typedef struct SubscriptingRefState
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
{
bool isassignment; /* is it assignment, or just fetch? */
Support subscripting of arbitrary types, not only arrays. This patch generalizes the subscripting infrastructure so that any data type can be subscripted, if it provides a handler function to define what that means. Traditional variable-length (varlena) arrays all use array_subscript_handler(), while the existing fixed-length types that support subscripting use raw_array_subscript_handler(). It's expected that other types that want to use subscripting notation will define their own handlers. (This patch provides no such new features, though; it only lays the foundation for them.) To do this, move the parser's semantic processing of subscripts (including coercion to whatever data type is required) into a method callback supplied by the handler. On the execution side, replace the ExecEvalSubscriptingRef* layer of functions with direct calls to callback-supplied execution routines. (Thus, essentially no new run-time overhead should be caused by this patch. Indeed, there is room to remove some overhead by supplying specialized execution routines. This patch does a little bit in that line, but more could be done.) Additional work is required here and there to remove formerly hard-wired assumptions about the result type, collation, etc of a SubscriptingRef expression node; and to remove assumptions that the subscript values must be integers. One useful side-effect of this is that we now have a less squishy mechanism for identifying whether a data type is a "true" array: instead of wiring in weird rules about typlen, we can look to see if pg_type.typsubscript == F_ARRAY_SUBSCRIPT_HANDLER. For this to be bulletproof, we have to forbid user-defined types from using that handler directly; but there seems no good reason for them to do so. This patch also removes assumptions that the number of subscripts is limited to MAXDIM (6), or indeed has any hard-wired limit. That limit still applies to types handled by array_subscript_handler or raw_array_subscript_handler, but to discourage other dependencies on this constant, I've moved it from c.h to utils/array.h. Dmitry Dolgov, reviewed at various times by Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov, Peter Eisentraut, Pavel Stehule Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVDuGBv=M0FqBYX8DPebS3F_0KQ6OVFobGJPM507_SZ_w@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVovR+XY4mfk-7oNk-rF91gH0PebnNfuUjuuDsyHjOcVA@mail.gmail.com
2020-12-09 18:40:37 +01:00
/* workspace for type-specific subscripting code */
void *workspace;
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
Support subscripting of arbitrary types, not only arrays. This patch generalizes the subscripting infrastructure so that any data type can be subscripted, if it provides a handler function to define what that means. Traditional variable-length (varlena) arrays all use array_subscript_handler(), while the existing fixed-length types that support subscripting use raw_array_subscript_handler(). It's expected that other types that want to use subscripting notation will define their own handlers. (This patch provides no such new features, though; it only lays the foundation for them.) To do this, move the parser's semantic processing of subscripts (including coercion to whatever data type is required) into a method callback supplied by the handler. On the execution side, replace the ExecEvalSubscriptingRef* layer of functions with direct calls to callback-supplied execution routines. (Thus, essentially no new run-time overhead should be caused by this patch. Indeed, there is room to remove some overhead by supplying specialized execution routines. This patch does a little bit in that line, but more could be done.) Additional work is required here and there to remove formerly hard-wired assumptions about the result type, collation, etc of a SubscriptingRef expression node; and to remove assumptions that the subscript values must be integers. One useful side-effect of this is that we now have a less squishy mechanism for identifying whether a data type is a "true" array: instead of wiring in weird rules about typlen, we can look to see if pg_type.typsubscript == F_ARRAY_SUBSCRIPT_HANDLER. For this to be bulletproof, we have to forbid user-defined types from using that handler directly; but there seems no good reason for them to do so. This patch also removes assumptions that the number of subscripts is limited to MAXDIM (6), or indeed has any hard-wired limit. That limit still applies to types handled by array_subscript_handler or raw_array_subscript_handler, but to discourage other dependencies on this constant, I've moved it from c.h to utils/array.h. Dmitry Dolgov, reviewed at various times by Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov, Peter Eisentraut, Pavel Stehule Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVDuGBv=M0FqBYX8DPebS3F_0KQ6OVFobGJPM507_SZ_w@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVovR+XY4mfk-7oNk-rF91gH0PebnNfuUjuuDsyHjOcVA@mail.gmail.com
2020-12-09 18:40:37 +01:00
/* numupper and upperprovided[] are filled at expression compile time */
/* at runtime, subscripts are computed in upperindex[]/upperindexnull[] */
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
int numupper;
Support subscripting of arbitrary types, not only arrays. This patch generalizes the subscripting infrastructure so that any data type can be subscripted, if it provides a handler function to define what that means. Traditional variable-length (varlena) arrays all use array_subscript_handler(), while the existing fixed-length types that support subscripting use raw_array_subscript_handler(). It's expected that other types that want to use subscripting notation will define their own handlers. (This patch provides no such new features, though; it only lays the foundation for them.) To do this, move the parser's semantic processing of subscripts (including coercion to whatever data type is required) into a method callback supplied by the handler. On the execution side, replace the ExecEvalSubscriptingRef* layer of functions with direct calls to callback-supplied execution routines. (Thus, essentially no new run-time overhead should be caused by this patch. Indeed, there is room to remove some overhead by supplying specialized execution routines. This patch does a little bit in that line, but more could be done.) Additional work is required here and there to remove formerly hard-wired assumptions about the result type, collation, etc of a SubscriptingRef expression node; and to remove assumptions that the subscript values must be integers. One useful side-effect of this is that we now have a less squishy mechanism for identifying whether a data type is a "true" array: instead of wiring in weird rules about typlen, we can look to see if pg_type.typsubscript == F_ARRAY_SUBSCRIPT_HANDLER. For this to be bulletproof, we have to forbid user-defined types from using that handler directly; but there seems no good reason for them to do so. This patch also removes assumptions that the number of subscripts is limited to MAXDIM (6), or indeed has any hard-wired limit. That limit still applies to types handled by array_subscript_handler or raw_array_subscript_handler, but to discourage other dependencies on this constant, I've moved it from c.h to utils/array.h. Dmitry Dolgov, reviewed at various times by Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov, Peter Eisentraut, Pavel Stehule Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVDuGBv=M0FqBYX8DPebS3F_0KQ6OVFobGJPM507_SZ_w@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVovR+XY4mfk-7oNk-rF91gH0PebnNfuUjuuDsyHjOcVA@mail.gmail.com
2020-12-09 18:40:37 +01:00
bool *upperprovided; /* indicates if this position is supplied */
Datum *upperindex;
bool *upperindexnull;
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
/* similarly for lower indexes, if any */
int numlower;
Support subscripting of arbitrary types, not only arrays. This patch generalizes the subscripting infrastructure so that any data type can be subscripted, if it provides a handler function to define what that means. Traditional variable-length (varlena) arrays all use array_subscript_handler(), while the existing fixed-length types that support subscripting use raw_array_subscript_handler(). It's expected that other types that want to use subscripting notation will define their own handlers. (This patch provides no such new features, though; it only lays the foundation for them.) To do this, move the parser's semantic processing of subscripts (including coercion to whatever data type is required) into a method callback supplied by the handler. On the execution side, replace the ExecEvalSubscriptingRef* layer of functions with direct calls to callback-supplied execution routines. (Thus, essentially no new run-time overhead should be caused by this patch. Indeed, there is room to remove some overhead by supplying specialized execution routines. This patch does a little bit in that line, but more could be done.) Additional work is required here and there to remove formerly hard-wired assumptions about the result type, collation, etc of a SubscriptingRef expression node; and to remove assumptions that the subscript values must be integers. One useful side-effect of this is that we now have a less squishy mechanism for identifying whether a data type is a "true" array: instead of wiring in weird rules about typlen, we can look to see if pg_type.typsubscript == F_ARRAY_SUBSCRIPT_HANDLER. For this to be bulletproof, we have to forbid user-defined types from using that handler directly; but there seems no good reason for them to do so. This patch also removes assumptions that the number of subscripts is limited to MAXDIM (6), or indeed has any hard-wired limit. That limit still applies to types handled by array_subscript_handler or raw_array_subscript_handler, but to discourage other dependencies on this constant, I've moved it from c.h to utils/array.h. Dmitry Dolgov, reviewed at various times by Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov, Peter Eisentraut, Pavel Stehule Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVDuGBv=M0FqBYX8DPebS3F_0KQ6OVFobGJPM507_SZ_w@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVovR+XY4mfk-7oNk-rF91gH0PebnNfuUjuuDsyHjOcVA@mail.gmail.com
2020-12-09 18:40:37 +01:00
bool *lowerprovided;
Datum *lowerindex;
bool *lowerindexnull;
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
/* for assignment, new value to assign is evaluated into here */
Datum replacevalue;
bool replacenull;
Support subscripting of arbitrary types, not only arrays. This patch generalizes the subscripting infrastructure so that any data type can be subscripted, if it provides a handler function to define what that means. Traditional variable-length (varlena) arrays all use array_subscript_handler(), while the existing fixed-length types that support subscripting use raw_array_subscript_handler(). It's expected that other types that want to use subscripting notation will define their own handlers. (This patch provides no such new features, though; it only lays the foundation for them.) To do this, move the parser's semantic processing of subscripts (including coercion to whatever data type is required) into a method callback supplied by the handler. On the execution side, replace the ExecEvalSubscriptingRef* layer of functions with direct calls to callback-supplied execution routines. (Thus, essentially no new run-time overhead should be caused by this patch. Indeed, there is room to remove some overhead by supplying specialized execution routines. This patch does a little bit in that line, but more could be done.) Additional work is required here and there to remove formerly hard-wired assumptions about the result type, collation, etc of a SubscriptingRef expression node; and to remove assumptions that the subscript values must be integers. One useful side-effect of this is that we now have a less squishy mechanism for identifying whether a data type is a "true" array: instead of wiring in weird rules about typlen, we can look to see if pg_type.typsubscript == F_ARRAY_SUBSCRIPT_HANDLER. For this to be bulletproof, we have to forbid user-defined types from using that handler directly; but there seems no good reason for them to do so. This patch also removes assumptions that the number of subscripts is limited to MAXDIM (6), or indeed has any hard-wired limit. That limit still applies to types handled by array_subscript_handler or raw_array_subscript_handler, but to discourage other dependencies on this constant, I've moved it from c.h to utils/array.h. Dmitry Dolgov, reviewed at various times by Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov, Peter Eisentraut, Pavel Stehule Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVDuGBv=M0FqBYX8DPebS3F_0KQ6OVFobGJPM507_SZ_w@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVovR+XY4mfk-7oNk-rF91gH0PebnNfuUjuuDsyHjOcVA@mail.gmail.com
2020-12-09 18:40:37 +01:00
/* if we have a nested assignment, sbs_fetch_old puts old value here */
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
Datum prevvalue;
bool prevnull;
Renaming for new subscripting mechanism Over at patch https://commitfest.postgresql.org/21/1062/ Dmitry wants to introduce a more generic subscription mechanism, which allows subscripting not only arrays but also other object types such as JSONB. That functionality is introduced in a largish invasive patch, out of which this internal renaming patch was extracted. Author: Dmitry Dolgov Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcUK4EqPAu7XRRO5CCjMwhz5zvg+rfWuLzVoxp_5sKS6=w@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-01 16:50:32 +01:00
} SubscriptingRefState;
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
Support subscripting of arbitrary types, not only arrays. This patch generalizes the subscripting infrastructure so that any data type can be subscripted, if it provides a handler function to define what that means. Traditional variable-length (varlena) arrays all use array_subscript_handler(), while the existing fixed-length types that support subscripting use raw_array_subscript_handler(). It's expected that other types that want to use subscripting notation will define their own handlers. (This patch provides no such new features, though; it only lays the foundation for them.) To do this, move the parser's semantic processing of subscripts (including coercion to whatever data type is required) into a method callback supplied by the handler. On the execution side, replace the ExecEvalSubscriptingRef* layer of functions with direct calls to callback-supplied execution routines. (Thus, essentially no new run-time overhead should be caused by this patch. Indeed, there is room to remove some overhead by supplying specialized execution routines. This patch does a little bit in that line, but more could be done.) Additional work is required here and there to remove formerly hard-wired assumptions about the result type, collation, etc of a SubscriptingRef expression node; and to remove assumptions that the subscript values must be integers. One useful side-effect of this is that we now have a less squishy mechanism for identifying whether a data type is a "true" array: instead of wiring in weird rules about typlen, we can look to see if pg_type.typsubscript == F_ARRAY_SUBSCRIPT_HANDLER. For this to be bulletproof, we have to forbid user-defined types from using that handler directly; but there seems no good reason for them to do so. This patch also removes assumptions that the number of subscripts is limited to MAXDIM (6), or indeed has any hard-wired limit. That limit still applies to types handled by array_subscript_handler or raw_array_subscript_handler, but to discourage other dependencies on this constant, I've moved it from c.h to utils/array.h. Dmitry Dolgov, reviewed at various times by Tom Lane, Arthur Zakirov, Peter Eisentraut, Pavel Stehule Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVDuGBv=M0FqBYX8DPebS3F_0KQ6OVFobGJPM507_SZ_w@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcVovR+XY4mfk-7oNk-rF91gH0PebnNfuUjuuDsyHjOcVA@mail.gmail.com
2020-12-09 18:40:37 +01:00
/* Execution step methods used for SubscriptingRef */
typedef struct SubscriptExecSteps
{
/* See nodes/subscripting.h for more detail about these */
ExecEvalBoolSubroutine sbs_check_subscripts; /* process subscripts */
ExecEvalSubroutine sbs_fetch; /* fetch an element */
ExecEvalSubroutine sbs_assign; /* assign to an element */
ExecEvalSubroutine sbs_fetch_old; /* fetch old value for assignment */
} SubscriptExecSteps;
SQL/JSON: add standard JSON constructor functions This commit introduces the SQL/JSON standard-conforming constructors for JSON types: JSON_ARRAY() JSON_ARRAYAGG() JSON_OBJECT() JSON_OBJECTAGG() Most of the functionality was already present in PostgreSQL-specific functions, but these include some new functionality such as the ability to skip or include NULL values, and to allow duplicate keys or throw error when they are found, as well as the standard specified syntax to specify output type and format. Author: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> Author: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> Author: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> Author: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Reviewers have included (in no particular order) Andres Freund, Alexander Korotkov, Pavel Stehule, Andrew Alsup, Erik Rijkers, Zihong Yu, Himanshu Upadhyaya, Daniel Gustafsson, Justin Pryzby. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAF4Au4w2x-5LTnN_bxky-mq4=WOqsGsxSpENCzHRAzSnEd8+WQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd0bb935-0158-78a7-08b5-904886deac4b@postgrespro.ru Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d%40postgresql.org
2023-03-29 12:11:36 +02:00
/* EEOP_JSON_CONSTRUCTOR state, too big to inline */
typedef struct JsonConstructorExprState
{
JsonConstructorExpr *constructor;
Datum *arg_values;
bool *arg_nulls;
Oid *arg_types;
struct
{
int category;
Oid outfuncid;
} *arg_type_cache; /* cache for datum_to_json[b]() */
int nargs;
} JsonConstructorExprState;
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
Rearrange execution of PARAM_EXTERN Params for plpgsql's benefit. This patch does three interrelated things: * Create a new expression execution step type EEOP_PARAM_CALLBACK and add the infrastructure needed for add-on modules to generate that. As discussed, the best control mechanism for that seems to be to add another hook function to ParamListInfo, which will be called by ExecInitExpr if it's supplied and a PARAM_EXTERN Param is found. For stand-alone expressions, we add a new entry point to allow the ParamListInfo to be specified directly, since it can't be retrieved from the parent plan node's EState. * Redesign the API for the ParamListInfo paramFetch hook so that the ParamExternData array can be entirely virtual. This also lets us get rid of ParamListInfo.paramMask, instead leaving it to the paramFetch hook to decide which param IDs should be accessible or not. plpgsql_param_fetch was already doing the identical masking check, so having callers do it too seemed redundant. While I was at it, I added a "speculative" flag to paramFetch that the planner can specify as TRUE to avoid unwanted failures. This solves an ancient problem for plpgsql that it couldn't provide values of non-DTYPE_VAR variables to the planner for fear of triggering premature "record not assigned yet" or "field not found" errors during planning. * Rework plpgsql to get rid of the need for "unshared" parameter lists, by dint of turning the single ParamListInfo per estate into a nearly read-only data structure that doesn't instantiate any per-variable data. Instead, the paramFetch hook controls access to per-variable data and can make the right decisions on the fly, replacing the cases that we used to need multiple ParamListInfos for. This might perhaps have been a performance loss on its own, but by using a paramCompile hook we can bypass plpgsql_param_fetch entirely during normal query execution. (It's now only called when, eg, we copy the ParamListInfo into a cursor portal. copyParamList() or SerializeParamList() effectively instantiate the virtual parameter array as a simple physical array without a paramFetch hook, which is what we want in those cases.) This allows reverting most of commit 6c82d8d1f, though I kept the cosmetic code-consolidation aspects of that (eg the assign_simple_var function). Performance testing shows this to be at worst a break-even change, and it can provide wins ranging up to 20% in test cases involving accesses to fields of "record" variables. The fact that values of such variables can now be exposed to the planner might produce wins in some situations, too, but I've not pursued that angle. In passing, remove the "parent" pointer from the arguments to ExecInitExprRec and related functions, instead storing that pointer in a transient field in ExprState. The ParamListInfo pointer for a stand-alone expression is handled the same way; we'd otherwise have had to add yet another recursively-passed-down argument in expression compilation. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/32589.1513706441@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-12-21 18:57:41 +01:00
/* functions in execExpr.c */
extern void ExprEvalPushStep(ExprState *es, const ExprEvalStep *s);
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
Rearrange execution of PARAM_EXTERN Params for plpgsql's benefit. This patch does three interrelated things: * Create a new expression execution step type EEOP_PARAM_CALLBACK and add the infrastructure needed for add-on modules to generate that. As discussed, the best control mechanism for that seems to be to add another hook function to ParamListInfo, which will be called by ExecInitExpr if it's supplied and a PARAM_EXTERN Param is found. For stand-alone expressions, we add a new entry point to allow the ParamListInfo to be specified directly, since it can't be retrieved from the parent plan node's EState. * Redesign the API for the ParamListInfo paramFetch hook so that the ParamExternData array can be entirely virtual. This also lets us get rid of ParamListInfo.paramMask, instead leaving it to the paramFetch hook to decide which param IDs should be accessible or not. plpgsql_param_fetch was already doing the identical masking check, so having callers do it too seemed redundant. While I was at it, I added a "speculative" flag to paramFetch that the planner can specify as TRUE to avoid unwanted failures. This solves an ancient problem for plpgsql that it couldn't provide values of non-DTYPE_VAR variables to the planner for fear of triggering premature "record not assigned yet" or "field not found" errors during planning. * Rework plpgsql to get rid of the need for "unshared" parameter lists, by dint of turning the single ParamListInfo per estate into a nearly read-only data structure that doesn't instantiate any per-variable data. Instead, the paramFetch hook controls access to per-variable data and can make the right decisions on the fly, replacing the cases that we used to need multiple ParamListInfos for. This might perhaps have been a performance loss on its own, but by using a paramCompile hook we can bypass plpgsql_param_fetch entirely during normal query execution. (It's now only called when, eg, we copy the ParamListInfo into a cursor portal. copyParamList() or SerializeParamList() effectively instantiate the virtual parameter array as a simple physical array without a paramFetch hook, which is what we want in those cases.) This allows reverting most of commit 6c82d8d1f, though I kept the cosmetic code-consolidation aspects of that (eg the assign_simple_var function). Performance testing shows this to be at worst a break-even change, and it can provide wins ranging up to 20% in test cases involving accesses to fields of "record" variables. The fact that values of such variables can now be exposed to the planner might produce wins in some situations, too, but I've not pursued that angle. In passing, remove the "parent" pointer from the arguments to ExecInitExprRec and related functions, instead storing that pointer in a transient field in ExprState. The ParamListInfo pointer for a stand-alone expression is handled the same way; we'd otherwise have had to add yet another recursively-passed-down argument in expression compilation. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/32589.1513706441@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-12-21 18:57:41 +01:00
/* functions in execExprInterp.c */
extern void ExecReadyInterpretedExpr(ExprState *state);
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
extern ExprEvalOp ExecEvalStepOp(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op);
Perform slot validity checks in a separate pass over expression. This reduces code duplication a bit, but the primary benefit that it makes JITing expression evaluation easier. When doing so we can't, as previously done in the interpreted case, really change opcode without recompiling. Nor dow we just carry around unnecessary branches to avoid re-checking over and over. As a minor side-effect this makes ExecEvalStepOp() O(log(N)) rather than O(N). Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170901064131.tazjxwus3k2w3ybh@alap3.anarazel.de
2017-12-29 21:38:15 +01:00
extern Datum ExecInterpExprStillValid(ExprState *state, ExprContext *econtext, bool *isNull);
extern void CheckExprStillValid(ExprState *state, ExprContext *econtext);
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
/*
* Non fast-path execution functions. These are externs instead of statics in
* execExprInterp.c, because that allows them to be used by other methods of
* expression evaluation, reducing code duplication.
*/
Handle EEOP_FUNCEXPR_[STRICT_]FUSAGE out of line. This isn't a very common op, and it doesn't seem worth duplicating for JIT. Author: Andres Freund
2018-03-21 01:32:21 +01:00
extern void ExecEvalFuncExprFusage(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
extern void ExecEvalFuncExprStrictFusage(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
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
extern void ExecEvalParamExec(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
extern void ExecEvalParamExtern(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
Add soft error handling to some expression nodes This adjusts the code for CoerceViaIO and CoerceToDomain expression nodes to handle errors softly. For CoerceViaIo, this adds a new ExprEvalStep opcode EEOP_IOCOERCE_SAFE, which is implemented in the new accompanying function ExecEvalCoerceViaIOSafe(). The only difference from EEOP_IOCOERCE's inline implementation is that the input function receives an ErrorSaveContext via the function's FunctionCallInfo.context, which it can use to handle errors softly. For CoerceToDomain, this simply entails replacing the ereport() in ExecEvalConstraintNotNull() and ExecEvalConstraintCheck() by errsave() passing it the ErrorSaveContext passed in the expression's ExprEvalStep. In both cases, the ErrorSaveContext to be used is passed by setting ExprState.escontext to point to it before calling ExecInitExprRec() on the expression tree whose errors are to be handled softly. Note that there's no functional change as of this commit as no call site of ExecInitExprRec() has been changed. This is intended for implementing new SQL/JSON expression nodes in future commits. Extracted from a much larger patch to add SQL/JSON query functions. Author: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> Author: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> Author: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> Author: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> Author: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Reviewers have included (in no particular order) Andres Freund, Alexander Korotkov, Pavel Stehule, Andrew Alsup, Erik Rijkers, Zihong Yu, Himanshu Upadhyaya, Daniel Gustafsson, Justin Pryzby, Álvaro Herrera, Jian He, Peter Eisentraut Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd0bb935-0158-78a7-08b5-904886deac4b@postgrespro.ru Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d%40postgresql.org Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqHROpf9e644D8BRqYvaAPmgBZVup-xKMDPk-nd4EpgzHw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqE4XTdfb1nW=Ojoy_tQSRhYt-q_kb6i5d4xcKyrLC1Nbg@mail.gmail.com
2024-01-24 05:35:22 +01:00
extern void ExecEvalCoerceViaIOSafe(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op);
Add back SQLValueFunction for SQL keywords This is equivalent to a revert of f193883 and fb32748, with the addition that the declaration of the SQLValueFunction node needs to gain a couple of node_attr for query jumbling. The performance impact of removing the function call inlining is proving to be too huge for some workloads where these are used. A worst-case test case of involving only simple SELECT queries with a SQL keyword is proving to lead to a reduction of 10% in TPS via pgbench and prepared queries on a high-end machine. None of the tests I ran back for this set of changes saw such a huge gap, but Alexander Lakhin and Andres Freund have found that this can be noticeable. Keeping the older performance would mean to do more inlining in the executor when using COERCE_SQL_SYNTAX for a function expression, similarly to what SQLValueFunction does. This requires more redesign work and there is little time until 16beta1 is released, so for now reverting the change is the best way forward, bringing back the previous performance. Bump catalog version. Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/b32bed1b-0746-9b20-1472-4bdc9ca66d52@gmail.com
2023-05-17 03:19:17 +02:00
extern void ExecEvalSQLValueFunction(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op);
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
extern void ExecEvalCurrentOfExpr(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op);
Code review for NextValueExpr expression node type. Add missing infrastructure for this node type, notably in ruleutils.c where its lack could demonstrably cause EXPLAIN to fail. Add outfuncs/readfuncs support. (outfuncs support is useful today for debugging purposes. The readfuncs support may never be needed, since at present it would only matter for parallel query and NextValueExpr should never appear in a parallelizable query; but it seems like a bad idea to have a primnode type that isn't fully supported here.) Teach planner infrastructure that NextValueExpr is a volatile, parallel-unsafe, non-leaky expression node with cost cpu_operator_cost. Given its limited scope of usage, there *might* be no live bug today from the lack of that knowledge, but it's certainly going to bite us on the rear someday. Teach pg_stat_statements about the new node type, too. While at it, also teach cost_qual_eval() that MinMaxExpr, SQLValueFunction, XmlExpr, and CoerceToDomain should be charged as cpu_operator_cost. Failing to do this for SQLValueFunction was an oversight in my commit 0bb51aa96. The others are longer-standing oversights, but no time like the present to fix them. (In principle, CoerceToDomain could have cost much higher than this, but it doesn't presently seem worth trying to examine the domain's constraints here.) Modify execExprInterp.c to execute NextValueExpr as an out-of-line function; it seems quite unlikely to me that it's worth insisting that it be inlined in all expression eval methods. Besides, providing the out-of-line function doesn't stop anyone from inlining if they want to. Adjust some places where NextValueExpr support had been inserted with the aid of a dartboard rather than keeping it in the same order as elsewhere. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/23862.1499981661@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-07-14 21:25:43 +02:00
extern void ExecEvalNextValueExpr(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op);
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
extern void ExecEvalRowNull(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
extern void ExecEvalRowNotNull(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
extern void ExecEvalArrayExpr(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op);
Support arrays over domains. Allowing arrays with a domain type as their element type was left un-done in the original domain patch, but not for any very good reason. This omission leads to such surprising results as array_agg() not working on a domain column, because the parser can't identify a suitable output type for the polymorphic aggregate. In order to fix this, first clean up the APIs of coerce_to_domain() and some internal functions in parse_coerce.c so that we consistently pass around a CoercionContext along with CoercionForm. Previously, we sometimes passed an "isExplicit" boolean flag instead, which is strictly less information; and coerce_to_domain() didn't even get that, but instead had to reverse-engineer isExplicit from CoercionForm. That's contrary to the documentation in primnodes.h that says that CoercionForm only affects display and not semantics. I don't think this change fixes any live bugs, but it makes things more consistent. The main reason for doing it though is that now build_coercion_expression() receives ccontext, which it needs in order to be able to recursively invoke coerce_to_target_type(). Next, reimplement ArrayCoerceExpr so that the node does not directly know any details of what has to be done to the individual array elements while performing the array coercion. Instead, the per-element processing is represented by a sub-expression whose input is a source array element and whose output is a target array element. This simplifies life in parse_coerce.c, because it can build that sub-expression by a recursive invocation of coerce_to_target_type(). The executor now handles the per-element processing as a compiled expression instead of hard-wired code. The main advantage of this is that we can use a single ArrayCoerceExpr to handle as many as three successive steps per element: base type conversion, typmod coercion, and domain constraint checking. The old code used two stacked ArrayCoerceExprs to handle type + typmod coercion, which was pretty inefficient, and adding yet another array deconstruction to do domain constraint checking seemed very unappetizing. In the case where we just need a single, very simple coercion function, doing this straightforwardly leads to a noticeable increase in the per-array-element runtime cost. Hence, add an additional shortcut evalfunc in execExprInterp.c that skips unnecessary overhead for that specific form of expression. The runtime speed of simple cases is within 1% or so of where it was before, while cases that previously required two levels of array processing are significantly faster. Finally, create an implicit array type for every domain type, as we do for base types, enums, etc. Everything except the array-coercion case seems to just work without further effort. Tom Lane, reviewed by Andrew Dunstan Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9852.1499791473@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-09-30 19:40:56 +02:00
extern void ExecEvalArrayCoerce(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
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
extern void ExecEvalRow(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op);
extern void ExecEvalMinMax(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op);
extern void ExecEvalFieldSelect(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
extern void ExecEvalFieldStoreDeForm(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
extern void ExecEvalFieldStoreForm(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
extern void ExecEvalConvertRowtype(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
extern void ExecEvalScalarArrayOp(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op);
Speedup ScalarArrayOpExpr evaluation ScalarArrayOpExprs with "useOr=true" and a set of Consts on the righthand side have traditionally been evaluated by using a linear search over the array. When these arrays contain large numbers of elements then this linear search could become a significant part of execution time. Here we add a new method of evaluating ScalarArrayOpExpr expressions to allow them to be evaluated by first building a hash table containing each element, then on subsequent evaluations, we just probe that hash table to determine if there is a match. The planner is in charge of determining when this optimization is possible and it enables it by setting hashfuncid in the ScalarArrayOpExpr. The executor will only perform the hash table evaluation when the hashfuncid is set. This means that not all cases are optimized. For example CHECK constraints containing an IN clause won't go through the planner, so won't get the hashfuncid set. We could maybe do something about that at some later date. The reason we're not doing it now is from fear that we may slow down cases where the expression is evaluated only once. Those cases can be common, for example, a single row INSERT to a table with a CHECK constraint containing an IN clause. In the planner, we enable this when there are suitable hash functions for the ScalarArrayOpExpr's operator and only when there is at least MIN_ARRAY_SIZE_FOR_HASHED_SAOP elements in the array. The threshold is currently set to 9. Author: James Coleman, David Rowley Reviewed-by: David Rowley, Tomas Vondra, Heikki Linnakangas Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAaqYe8x62+=wn0zvNKCj55tPpg-JBHzhZFFc6ANovdqFw7-dA@mail.gmail.com
2021-04-08 13:51:22 +02:00
extern void ExecEvalHashedScalarArrayOp(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
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
extern void ExecEvalConstraintNotNull(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op);
extern void ExecEvalConstraintCheck(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op);
extern void ExecEvalXmlExpr(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op);
Move ExecEvalJsonConstructor new function to a more natural place Commit 7081ac46ace8 put it at the end of the file, but that doesn't look very nice.
2023-03-31 12:55:25 +02:00
extern void ExecEvalJsonConstructor(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
SQL/JSON: support the IS JSON predicate This patch introduces the SQL standard IS JSON predicate. It operates on text and bytea values representing JSON, as well as on the json and jsonb types. Each test has IS and IS NOT variants and supports a WITH UNIQUE KEYS flag. The tests are: IS JSON [VALUE] IS JSON ARRAY IS JSON OBJECT IS JSON SCALAR These should be self-explanatory. The WITH UNIQUE KEYS flag makes these return false when duplicate keys exist in any object within the value, not necessarily directly contained in the outermost object. Author: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> Author: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> Author: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> Author: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Author: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> Reviewers have included (in no particular order) Andres Freund, Alexander Korotkov, Pavel Stehule, Andrew Alsup, Erik Rijkers, Zihong Yu, Himanshu Upadhyaya, Daniel Gustafsson, Justin Pryzby. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAF4Au4w2x-5LTnN_bxky-mq4=WOqsGsxSpENCzHRAzSnEd8+WQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd0bb935-0158-78a7-08b5-904886deac4b@postgrespro.ru Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d%40postgresql.org
2023-03-31 22:34:04 +02:00
extern void ExecEvalJsonIsPredicate(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op);
Add SQL/JSON query functions This introduces the following SQL/JSON functions for querying JSON data using jsonpath expressions: JSON_EXISTS(), which can be used to apply a jsonpath expression to a JSON value to check if it yields any values. JSON_QUERY(), which can be used to to apply a jsonpath expression to a JSON value to get a JSON object, an array, or a string. There are various options to control whether multi-value result uses array wrappers and whether the singleton scalar strings are quoted or not. JSON_VALUE(), which can be used to apply a jsonpath expression to a JSON value to return a single scalar value, producing an error if it multiple values are matched. Both JSON_VALUE() and JSON_QUERY() functions have options for handling EMPTY and ERROR conditions, which can be used to specify the behavior when no values are matched and when an error occurs during jsonpath evaluation, respectively. Author: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> Author: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> Author: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> Author: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> Author: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Author: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> Author: Jian He <jian.universality@gmail.com> Reviewers have included (in no particular order): Andres Freund, Alexander Korotkov, Pavel Stehule, Andrew Alsup, Erik Rijkers, Zihong Yu, Himanshu Upadhyaya, Daniel Gustafsson, Justin Pryzby, Álvaro Herrera, Jian He, Anton A. Melnikov, Nikita Malakhov, Peter Eisentraut, Tomas Vondra Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd0bb935-0158-78a7-08b5-904886deac4b@postgrespro.ru Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220616233130.rparivafipt6doj3@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d%40postgresql.org Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqHROpf9e644D8BRqYvaAPmgBZVup-xKMDPk-nd4EpgzHw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqE4XTdfb1nW=Ojoy_tQSRhYt-q_kb6i5d4xcKyrLC1Nbg@mail.gmail.com
2024-03-21 09:06:27 +01:00
extern int ExecEvalJsonExprPath(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
extern void ExecEvalJsonCoercion(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
extern void ExecEvalJsonCoercionFinish(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op);
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
extern void ExecEvalGroupingFunc(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op);
Add RETURNING support to MERGE. This allows a RETURNING clause to be appended to a MERGE query, to return values based on each row inserted, updated, or deleted. As with plain INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE commands, the returned values are based on the new contents of the target table for INSERT and UPDATE actions, and on its old contents for DELETE actions. Values from the source relation may also be returned. As with INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE, the output of MERGE ... RETURNING may be used as the source relation for other operations such as WITH queries and COPY commands. Additionally, a special function merge_action() is provided, which returns 'INSERT', 'UPDATE', or 'DELETE', depending on the action executed for each row. The merge_action() function can be used anywhere in the RETURNING list, including in arbitrary expressions and subqueries, but it is an error to use it anywhere outside of a MERGE query's RETURNING list. Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Isaac Morland, Vik Fearing, Alvaro Herrera, Gurjeet Singh, Jian He, Jeff Davis, Merlin Moncure, Peter Eisentraut, and Wolfgang Walther. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCWePEGQR5LBn-vD6SfeLZafzEm2Qy_L_Oky2=qw2w3Pzg@mail.gmail.com
2024-03-17 14:58:59 +01:00
extern void ExecEvalMergeSupportFunc(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
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
extern void ExecEvalSubPlan(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
extern void ExecEvalWholeRowVar(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
Move EEOP_*_SYSVAR evaluation out of line. This mainly de-duplicates code. As evaluating a system variable isn't the hottest path and the current inline implementation ends up calling out to an external function anyway, this is OK from a performance POV. The main motivation for de-duplicating is the upcoming slot abstraction work, after which there's not guaranteed to be a HeapTuple backing the slot. Author: Andres Freund, Amit Khandekar Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181105210039.hh4vvi4vwoq5ba2q@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-11-07 20:08:45 +01:00
extern void ExecEvalSysVar(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext, TupleTableSlot *slot);
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
expression eval: Reduce number of steps for agg transition invocations. Do so by combining the various steps that are part of aggregate transition function invocation into one larger step. As some of the current steps are only necessary for some aggregates, have one variant of the aggregate transition step for each possible combination. To avoid further manual copies of code in the different transition step implementations, move most of the code into helper functions marked as "always inline". The benefit of this change is an increase in performance when aggregating lots of rows. This comes in part due to the reduced number of indirect jumps due to the reduced number of steps, and in part by reducing redundant setup code across steps. This mainly benefits interpreted execution, but the code generated by JIT is also improved a bit. As a nice side-effect it also ends up making the code a bit simpler. A small additional optimization is removing the need to set aggstate->curaggcontext before calling ExecAggInitGroup, choosing to instead passign curaggcontext as an argument. It was, in contrast to other aggregate related functions, only needed to fetch a memory context to copy the transition value into. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20191023163849.sosqbfs5yenocez3@alap3.anarazel.de https://postgr.es/m/5c371df7cee903e8cd4c685f90c6c72086d3a2dc.camel@j-davis.com
2020-02-24 23:39:22 +01:00
extern void ExecAggInitGroup(AggState *aggstate, AggStatePerTrans pertrans, AggStatePerGroup pergroup,
ExprContext *aggcontext);
Rename ExecAggTransReparent, and improve its documentation. The name of this function suggests that it ought to reparent R/W expanded objects to be children of the persistent aggcontext, instead of copying them. In fact it does no such thing, and if you try to make it do so you will see multiple regression failures. Rename it to the less-misleading ExecAggCopyTransValue, and add commentary about why that attractive-sounding optimization won't work. Also adjust comments at call sites, some of which were describing logic that has since been moved into ExecAggCopyTransValue. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3004282.1681930251@sss.pgh.pa.us
2023-04-24 19:01:33 +02:00
extern Datum ExecAggCopyTransValue(AggState *aggstate, AggStatePerTrans pertrans,
Datum newValue, bool newValueIsNull,
Datum oldValue, bool oldValueIsNull);
Improve performance of ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggreagtes have, since implemented in Postgres, been executed by always performing a sort in nodeAgg.c to sort the tuples in the current group into the correct order before calling the transition function on the sorted tuples. This was not great as often there might be an index that could have provided pre-sorted input and allowed the transition functions to be called as the rows come in, rather than having to store them in a tuplestore in order to sort them once all the tuples for the group have arrived. Here we change the planner so it requests a path with a sort order which supports the most amount of ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregate functions and add new code to the executor to allow it to support the processing of ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates where the tuples are already sorted in the correct order. Since there can be many ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates in any given query level, it's very possible that we can't find an order that suits all of these aggregates. The sort order that the planner chooses is simply the one that suits the most aggregate functions. We take the most strictly sorted variation of each order and see how many aggregate functions can use that, then we try again with the order of the remaining aggregates to see if another order would suit more aggregate functions. For example: SELECT agg(a ORDER BY a),agg2(a ORDER BY a,b) ... would request the sort order to be {a, b} because {a} is a subset of the sort order of {a,b}, but; SELECT agg(a ORDER BY a),agg2(a ORDER BY c) ... would just pick a plan ordered by {a} (we give precedence to aggregates which are earlier in the targetlist). SELECT agg(a ORDER BY a),agg2(a ORDER BY b),agg3(a ORDER BY b) ... would choose to order by {b} since two aggregates suit that vs just one that requires input ordered by {a}. Author: David Rowley Reviewed-by: Ronan Dunklau, James Coleman, Ranier Vilela, Richard Guo, Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvpHzfo92%3DR4W0%2BxVua3BUYCKMckWAmo-2t_KiXN-wYH%3Dw%40mail.gmail.com
2022-08-02 13:11:45 +02:00
extern bool ExecEvalPreOrderedDistinctSingle(AggState *aggstate,
AggStatePerTrans pertrans);
extern bool ExecEvalPreOrderedDistinctMulti(AggState *aggstate,
AggStatePerTrans pertrans);
Expression evaluation based aggregate transition invocation. Previously aggregate transition and combination functions were invoked by special case code in nodeAgg.c, evaluating input and filters separately using the expression evaluation machinery. That turns out to not be great for performance for several reasons: - repeated expression evaluations have some cost - the transition functions invocations are poorly predicted, as commonly there are multiple aggregates in a query, resulting in the same call-stack invoking different functions. - filter and input computation had to be done separately - the special case code made it hard to implement JITing of the whole transition function invocation Address this by building one large expression that computes input, evaluates filters, and invokes transition functions. This leads to moderate speedups in queries bottlenecked by aggregate computations, and enables large speedups for similar cases once JITing is done. There's potential for further improvement: - It'd be nice if we could simplify the somewhat expensive aggstate->all_pergroups lookups. - right now there's still an advance_transition_function invocation in nodeAgg.c, leading to some code duplication. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170901064131.tazjxwus3k2w3ybh@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-01-09 22:25:38 +01:00
extern void ExecEvalAggOrderedTransDatum(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
extern void ExecEvalAggOrderedTransTuple(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op,
ExprContext *econtext);
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
#endif /* EXEC_EXPR_H */