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

35 lines
1.4 KiB
Makefile
Raw Normal View History

Simplify make files, add full dependencies.
1996-10-27 10:55:05 +01:00
#-------------------------------------------------------------------------
#
# Makefile--
# Makefile for executor
#
# IDENTIFICATION
Remove cvs keywords from all files.
2010-09-20 22:08:53 +02:00
# src/backend/executor/Makefile
Simplify make files, add full dependencies.
1996-10-27 10:55:05 +01:00
#
#-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fix relative path references so that make knowns which dependencies refer to one another. Sort out builddir vs srcdir variable namings. Remove some now obsoleted make variables.
2000-08-31 18:12:35 +02:00
subdir = src/backend/executor
top_builddir = ../../..
include $(top_builddir)/src/Makefile.global
Simplify make files, add full dependencies.
1996-10-27 10:55:05 +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
OBJS = execAmi.o execCurrent.o execExpr.o execExprInterp.o \
execGrouping.o execIndexing.o execJunk.o \
Centralize executor-related partitioning code. Some code is moved from partition.c, which has grown very quickly lately; splitting the executor parts out might help to keep it from getting totally out of control. Other code is moved from execMain.c. All is moved to a new file execPartition.c. get_partition_for_tuple now has a new interface that more clearly separates executor concerns from generic concerns. Amit Langote. A slight comment tweak by me. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/1f0985f8-3b61-8bc4-4350-baa6d804cb6d@lab.ntt.co.jp
2017-11-15 16:23:28 +01:00
execMain.o execParallel.o execPartition.o execProcnode.o \
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
execReplication.o execScan.o execSRF.o execTuples.o \
Create executor and planner-backend support for decoupled heap and index scans, using in-memory tuple ID bitmaps as the intermediary. The planner frontend (path creation and cost estimation) is not there yet, so none of this code can be executed. I have tested it using some hacked planner code that is far too ugly to see the light of day, however. Committing now so that the bulk of the infrastructure changes go in before the tree drifts under me.
2005-04-20 00:35:18 +02:00
execUtils.o functions.o instrument.o nodeAppend.o nodeAgg.o \
nodeBitmapAnd.o nodeBitmapOr.o \
Move targetlist SRF handling from expression evaluation to new executor node. Evaluation of set returning functions (SRFs_ in the targetlist (like SELECT generate_series(1,5)) so far was done in the expression evaluation (i.e. ExecEvalExpr()) and projection (i.e. ExecProject/ExecTargetList) code. This meant that most executor nodes performing projection, and most expression evaluation functions, had to deal with the possibility that an evaluated expression could return a set of return values. That's bad because it leads to repeated code in a lot of places. It also, and that's my (Andres's) motivation, made it a lot harder to implement a more efficient way of doing expression evaluation. To fix this, introduce a new executor node (ProjectSet) that can evaluate targetlists containing one or more SRFs. To avoid the complexity of the old way of handling nested expressions returning sets (e.g. having to pass up ExprDoneCond, and dealing with arguments to functions returning sets etc.), those SRFs can only be at the top level of the node's targetlist. The planner makes sure (via split_pathtarget_at_srfs()) that SRF evaluation is only necessary in ProjectSet nodes and that SRFs are only present at the top level of the node's targetlist. If there are nested SRFs the planner creates multiple stacked ProjectSet nodes. The ProjectSet nodes always get input from an underlying node. We also discussed and prototyped evaluating targetlist SRFs using ROWS FROM(), but that turned out to be more complicated than we'd hoped. While moving SRF evaluation to ProjectSet would allow to retain the old "least common multiple" behavior when multiple SRFs are present in one targetlist (i.e. continue returning rows until all SRFs are at the end of their input at the same time), we decided to instead only return rows till all SRFs are exhausted, returning NULL for already exhausted ones. We deemed the previous behavior to be too confusing, unexpected and actually not particularly useful. As a side effect, the previously prohibited case of multiple set returning arguments to a function, is now allowed. Not because it's particularly desirable, but because it ends up working and there seems to be no argument for adding code to prohibit it. Currently the behavior for COALESCE and CASE containing SRFs has changed, returning multiple rows from the expression, even when the SRF containing "arm" of the expression is not evaluated. That's because the SRFs are evaluated in a separate ProjectSet node. As that's quite confusing, we're likely to instead prohibit SRFs in those places. But that's still being discussed, and the code would reside in places not touched here, so that's a task for later. There's a lot of, now superfluous, code dealing with set return expressions around. But as the changes to get rid of those are verbose largely boring, it seems better for readability to keep the cleanup as a separate commit. Author: Tom Lane and Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20160822214023.aaxz5l4igypowyri@alap3.anarazel.de
2017-01-18 21:46:50 +01:00
nodeBitmapHeapscan.o nodeBitmapIndexscan.o \
nodeCustom.o nodeFunctionscan.o nodeGather.o \
Add a Gather executor node. A Gather executor node runs any number of copies of a plan in an equal number of workers and merges all of the results into a single tuple stream. It can also run the plan itself, if the workers are unavailable or haven't started up yet. It is intended to work with the Partial Seq Scan node which will be added in future commits. It could also be used to implement parallel query of a different sort by itself, without help from Partial Seq Scan, if the single_copy mode is used. In that mode, a worker executes the plan, and the parallel leader does not, merely collecting the worker's results. So, a Gather node could be inserted into a plan to split the execution of that plan across two processes. Nested Gather nodes aren't currently supported, but we might want to add support for that in the future. There's nothing in the planner to actually generate Gather nodes yet, so it's not quite time to break out the champagne. But we're getting close. Amit Kapila. Some designs suggestions were provided by me, and I also reviewed the patch. Single-copy mode, documentation, and other minor changes also by me.
2015-10-01 01:23:36 +02:00
nodeHash.o nodeHashjoin.o nodeIndexscan.o nodeIndexonlyscan.o \
Add a Gather Merge executor node. Like Gather, we spawn multiple workers and run the same plan in each one; however, Gather Merge is used when each worker produces the same output ordering and we want to preserve that output ordering while merging together the streams of tuples from various workers. (In a way, Gather Merge is like a hybrid of Gather and MergeAppend.) This works out to a win if it saves us from having to perform an expensive Sort. In cases where only a small amount of data would need to be sorted, it may actually be faster to use a regular Gather node and then sort the results afterward, because Gather Merge sometimes needs to wait synchronously for tuples whereas a pure Gather generally doesn't. But if this avoids an expensive sort then it's a win. Rushabh Lathia, reviewed and tested by Amit Kapila, Thomas Munro, and Neha Sharma, and reviewed and revised by me. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAGPqQf09oPX-cQRpBKS0Gq49Z+m6KBxgxd_p9gX8CKk_d75HoQ@mail.gmail.com
2017-03-09 13:40:36 +01:00
nodeLimit.o nodeLockRows.o nodeGatherMerge.o \
Support MergeAppend plans, to allow sorted output from append relations. This patch eliminates the former need to sort the output of an Append scan when an ordered scan of an inheritance tree is wanted. This should be particularly useful for fast-start cases such as queries with LIMIT. Original patch by Greg Stark, with further hacking by Hans-Jurgen Schonig, Robert Haas, and Tom Lane.
2010-10-14 22:56:39 +02:00
nodeMaterial.o nodeMergeAppend.o nodeMergejoin.o nodeModifyTable.o \
Move targetlist SRF handling from expression evaluation to new executor node. Evaluation of set returning functions (SRFs_ in the targetlist (like SELECT generate_series(1,5)) so far was done in the expression evaluation (i.e. ExecEvalExpr()) and projection (i.e. ExecProject/ExecTargetList) code. This meant that most executor nodes performing projection, and most expression evaluation functions, had to deal with the possibility that an evaluated expression could return a set of return values. That's bad because it leads to repeated code in a lot of places. It also, and that's my (Andres's) motivation, made it a lot harder to implement a more efficient way of doing expression evaluation. To fix this, introduce a new executor node (ProjectSet) that can evaluate targetlists containing one or more SRFs. To avoid the complexity of the old way of handling nested expressions returning sets (e.g. having to pass up ExprDoneCond, and dealing with arguments to functions returning sets etc.), those SRFs can only be at the top level of the node's targetlist. The planner makes sure (via split_pathtarget_at_srfs()) that SRF evaluation is only necessary in ProjectSet nodes and that SRFs are only present at the top level of the node's targetlist. If there are nested SRFs the planner creates multiple stacked ProjectSet nodes. The ProjectSet nodes always get input from an underlying node. We also discussed and prototyped evaluating targetlist SRFs using ROWS FROM(), but that turned out to be more complicated than we'd hoped. While moving SRF evaluation to ProjectSet would allow to retain the old "least common multiple" behavior when multiple SRFs are present in one targetlist (i.e. continue returning rows until all SRFs are at the end of their input at the same time), we decided to instead only return rows till all SRFs are exhausted, returning NULL for already exhausted ones. We deemed the previous behavior to be too confusing, unexpected and actually not particularly useful. As a side effect, the previously prohibited case of multiple set returning arguments to a function, is now allowed. Not because it's particularly desirable, but because it ends up working and there seems to be no argument for adding code to prohibit it. Currently the behavior for COALESCE and CASE containing SRFs has changed, returning multiple rows from the expression, even when the SRF containing "arm" of the expression is not evaluated. That's because the SRFs are evaluated in a separate ProjectSet node. As that's quite confusing, we're likely to instead prohibit SRFs in those places. But that's still being discussed, and the code would reside in places not touched here, so that's a task for later. There's a lot of, now superfluous, code dealing with set return expressions around. But as the changes to get rid of those are verbose largely boring, it seems better for readability to keep the cleanup as a separate commit. Author: Tom Lane and Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20160822214023.aaxz5l4igypowyri@alap3.anarazel.de
2017-01-18 21:46:50 +01:00
nodeNestloop.o nodeProjectSet.o nodeRecursiveunion.o nodeResult.o \
TABLESAMPLE, SQL Standard and extensible Add a TABLESAMPLE clause to SELECT statements that allows user to specify random BERNOULLI sampling or block level SYSTEM sampling. Implementation allows for extensible sampling functions to be written, using a standard API. Basic version follows SQLStandard exactly. Usable concrete use cases for the sampling API follow in later commits. Petr Jelinek Reviewed by Michael Paquier and Simon Riggs
2015-05-15 20:37:10 +02:00
nodeSamplescan.o nodeSeqscan.o nodeSetOp.o nodeSort.o nodeUnique.o \
Add infrastructure to support EphemeralNamedRelation references. A QueryEnvironment concept is added, which allows new types of objects to be passed into queries from parsing on through execution. At this point, the only thing implemented is a collection of EphemeralNamedRelation objects -- relations which can be referenced by name in queries, but do not exist in the catalogs. The only type of ENR implemented is NamedTuplestore, but provision is made to add more types fairly easily. An ENR can carry its own TupleDesc or reference a relation in the catalogs by relid. Although these features can be used without SPI, convenience functions are added to SPI so that ENRs can easily be used by code run through SPI. The initial use of all this is going to be transition tables in AFTER triggers, but that will be added to each PL as a separate commit. An incidental effect of this patch is to produce a more informative error message if an attempt is made to modify the contents of a CTE from a referencing DML statement. No tests previously covered that possibility, so one is added. Kevin Grittner and Thomas Munro Reviewed by Heikki Linnakangas, David Fetter, and Thomas Munro with valuable comments and suggestions from many others
2017-04-01 06:17:18 +02:00
nodeValuesscan.o \
nodeCtescan.o nodeNamedtuplestorescan.o nodeWorktablescan.o \
Move the handling of SELECT FOR UPDATE locking and rechecking out of execMain.c and into a new plan node type LockRows. Like the recent change to put table updating into a ModifyTable plan node, this increases planning flexibility by allowing the operations to occur below the top level of the plan tree. It's necessary in any case to restore the previous behavior of having FOR UPDATE locking occur before ModifyTable does. This partially refactors EvalPlanQual to allow multiple rows-under-test to be inserted into the EPQ machinery before starting an EPQ test query. That isn't sufficient to fix EPQ's general bogosity in the face of plans that return multiple rows per test row, though. Since this patch is mostly about getting some plan node infrastructure in place and not about fixing ten-year-old bugs, I will leave EPQ improvements for another day. Another behavioral change that we could now think about is doing FOR UPDATE before LIMIT, but that too seems like it should be treated as a followon patch.
2009-10-12 20:10:51 +02:00
nodeGroup.o nodeSubplan.o nodeSubqueryscan.o nodeTidscan.o \
Support XMLTABLE query expression XMLTABLE is defined by the SQL/XML standard as a feature that allows turning XML-formatted data into relational form, so that it can be used as a <table primary> in the FROM clause of a query. This new construct provides significant simplicity and performance benefit for XML data processing; what in a client-side custom implementation was reported to take 20 minutes can be executed in 400ms using XMLTABLE. (The same functionality was said to take 10 seconds using nested PostgreSQL XPath function calls, and 5 seconds using XMLReader under PL/Python). The implemented syntax deviates slightly from what the standard requires. First, the standard indicates that the PASSING clause is optional and that multiple XML input documents may be given to it; we make it mandatory and accept a single document only. Second, we don't currently support a default namespace to be specified. This implementation relies on a new executor node based on a hardcoded method table. (Because the grammar is fixed, there is no extensibility in the current approach; further constructs can be implemented on top of this such as JSON_TABLE, but they require changes to core code.) Author: Pavel Stehule, Álvaro Herrera Extensively reviewed by: Craig Ringer Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFj8pRAgfzMD-LoSmnMGybD0WsEznLHWap8DO79+-GTRAPR4qA@mail.gmail.com
2017-03-08 16:39:37 +01:00
nodeForeignscan.o nodeWindowAgg.o tstoreReceiver.o tqueue.o spi.o \
nodeTableFuncscan.o
Simplify make files, add full dependencies.
1996-10-27 10:55:05 +01:00
Refactor backend makefiles to remove lots of duplicate code
2008-02-19 11:30:09 +01:00
include $(top_srcdir)/src/backend/common.mk