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/partitioning/partdesc.c

369 lines
10 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

Move code for managing PartitionDescs into a new file, partdesc.c This is similar in spirit to the existing partbounds.c file in the same directory, except that there's a lot less code in the new file created by this commit. Pending work in this area proposes to add a bunch more code related to PartitionDescs, though, and this will give us a good place to put it. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZUwPf_uanjF==gTGBMJrn8uCq52XYvAEorNkLrUdoawg@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-21 17:38:54 +01:00
/*-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*
* partdesc.c
* Support routines for manipulating partition descriptors
*
* Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2018, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
* Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California
*
* IDENTIFICATION
* src/backend/partitioning/partdesc.c
*
*-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*/
#include "postgres.h"
Allow ATTACH PARTITION with only ShareUpdateExclusiveLock. We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is weakened. To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process of building a PartitionDesc. If so, find_inheritance_children() might see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have been queued. To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there. Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return the same answer. The query planner will get confused if lookup up the PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent answer for the entire duration of query planning. Likewise, query execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a different PartitionDesc at different times. Invent a new PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency. This ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same view. Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it. For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some point. Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is started. We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a separate patch. There would still be a small window where a query that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without a full table lock. Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes. Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc are stable between planning and execution. So, add code so that if new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly. There does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added partitions. This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc. That currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc indexes between backends. Each backend will ignore the concurrently added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions. If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to share PartitionDescs across backends. There is a draft patch to serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch was discussed, which may be a useful place to start. Patch by me. Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs, Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro Herrera for some review. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
2019-03-07 17:13:12 +01:00
#include "access/genam.h"
#include "access/htup_details.h"
#include "access/table.h"
#include "catalog/indexing.h"
Move code for managing PartitionDescs into a new file, partdesc.c This is similar in spirit to the existing partbounds.c file in the same directory, except that there's a lot less code in the new file created by this commit. Pending work in this area proposes to add a bunch more code related to PartitionDescs, though, and this will give us a good place to put it. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZUwPf_uanjF==gTGBMJrn8uCq52XYvAEorNkLrUdoawg@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-21 17:38:54 +01:00
#include "catalog/partition.h"
#include "catalog/pg_inherits.h"
#include "partitioning/partbounds.h"
#include "partitioning/partdesc.h"
Allow ATTACH PARTITION with only ShareUpdateExclusiveLock. We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is weakened. To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process of building a PartitionDesc. If so, find_inheritance_children() might see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have been queued. To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there. Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return the same answer. The query planner will get confused if lookup up the PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent answer for the entire duration of query planning. Likewise, query execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a different PartitionDesc at different times. Invent a new PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency. This ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same view. Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it. For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some point. Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is started. We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a separate patch. There would still be a small window where a query that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without a full table lock. Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes. Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc are stable between planning and execution. So, add code so that if new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly. There does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added partitions. This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc. That currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc indexes between backends. Each backend will ignore the concurrently added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions. If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to share PartitionDescs across backends. There is a draft patch to serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch was discussed, which may be a useful place to start. Patch by me. Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs, Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro Herrera for some review. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
2019-03-07 17:13:12 +01:00
#include "storage/bufmgr.h"
#include "storage/sinval.h"
Move code for managing PartitionDescs into a new file, partdesc.c This is similar in spirit to the existing partbounds.c file in the same directory, except that there's a lot less code in the new file created by this commit. Pending work in this area proposes to add a bunch more code related to PartitionDescs, though, and this will give us a good place to put it. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZUwPf_uanjF==gTGBMJrn8uCq52XYvAEorNkLrUdoawg@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-21 17:38:54 +01:00
#include "utils/builtins.h"
Allow ATTACH PARTITION with only ShareUpdateExclusiveLock. We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is weakened. To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process of building a PartitionDesc. If so, find_inheritance_children() might see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have been queued. To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there. Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return the same answer. The query planner will get confused if lookup up the PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent answer for the entire duration of query planning. Likewise, query execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a different PartitionDesc at different times. Invent a new PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency. This ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same view. Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it. For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some point. Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is started. We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a separate patch. There would still be a small window where a query that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without a full table lock. Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes. Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc are stable between planning and execution. So, add code so that if new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly. There does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added partitions. This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc. That currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc indexes between backends. Each backend will ignore the concurrently added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions. If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to share PartitionDescs across backends. There is a draft patch to serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch was discussed, which may be a useful place to start. Patch by me. Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs, Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro Herrera for some review. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
2019-03-07 17:13:12 +01:00
#include "utils/inval.h"
#include "utils/fmgroids.h"
#include "utils/hsearch.h"
Move code for managing PartitionDescs into a new file, partdesc.c This is similar in spirit to the existing partbounds.c file in the same directory, except that there's a lot less code in the new file created by this commit. Pending work in this area proposes to add a bunch more code related to PartitionDescs, though, and this will give us a good place to put it. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZUwPf_uanjF==gTGBMJrn8uCq52XYvAEorNkLrUdoawg@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-21 17:38:54 +01:00
#include "utils/lsyscache.h"
#include "utils/memutils.h"
#include "utils/rel.h"
#include "utils/partcache.h"
#include "utils/syscache.h"
Allow ATTACH PARTITION with only ShareUpdateExclusiveLock. We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is weakened. To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process of building a PartitionDesc. If so, find_inheritance_children() might see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have been queued. To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there. Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return the same answer. The query planner will get confused if lookup up the PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent answer for the entire duration of query planning. Likewise, query execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a different PartitionDesc at different times. Invent a new PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency. This ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same view. Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it. For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some point. Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is started. We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a separate patch. There would still be a small window where a query that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without a full table lock. Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes. Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc are stable between planning and execution. So, add code so that if new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly. There does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added partitions. This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc. That currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc indexes between backends. Each backend will ignore the concurrently added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions. If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to share PartitionDescs across backends. There is a draft patch to serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch was discussed, which may be a useful place to start. Patch by me. Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs, Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro Herrera for some review. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
2019-03-07 17:13:12 +01:00
typedef struct PartitionDirectoryData
{
MemoryContext pdir_mcxt;
HTAB *pdir_hash;
} PartitionDirectoryData;
typedef struct PartitionDirectoryEntry
{
Oid reloid;
Relation rel;
PartitionDesc pd;
} PartitionDirectoryEntry;
Move code for managing PartitionDescs into a new file, partdesc.c This is similar in spirit to the existing partbounds.c file in the same directory, except that there's a lot less code in the new file created by this commit. Pending work in this area proposes to add a bunch more code related to PartitionDescs, though, and this will give us a good place to put it. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZUwPf_uanjF==gTGBMJrn8uCq52XYvAEorNkLrUdoawg@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-21 17:38:54 +01:00
/*
* RelationBuildPartitionDesc
* Form rel's partition descriptor
*
* Not flushed from the cache by RelationClearRelation() unless changed because
* of addition or removal of partition.
*/
void
RelationBuildPartitionDesc(Relation rel)
{
PartitionDesc partdesc;
PartitionBoundInfo boundinfo = NULL;
List *inhoids;
PartitionBoundSpec **boundspecs = NULL;
Oid *oids = NULL;
ListCell *cell;
int i,
nparts;
PartitionKey key = RelationGetPartitionKey(rel);
MemoryContext oldcxt;
int *mapping;
Allow ATTACH PARTITION with only ShareUpdateExclusiveLock. We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is weakened. To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process of building a PartitionDesc. If so, find_inheritance_children() might see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have been queued. To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there. Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return the same answer. The query planner will get confused if lookup up the PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent answer for the entire duration of query planning. Likewise, query execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a different PartitionDesc at different times. Invent a new PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency. This ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same view. Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it. For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some point. Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is started. We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a separate patch. There would still be a small window where a query that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without a full table lock. Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes. Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc are stable between planning and execution. So, add code so that if new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly. There does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added partitions. This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc. That currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc indexes between backends. Each backend will ignore the concurrently added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions. If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to share PartitionDescs across backends. There is a draft patch to serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch was discussed, which may be a useful place to start. Patch by me. Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs, Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro Herrera for some review. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
2019-03-07 17:13:12 +01:00
/*
* Get partition oids from pg_inherits. This uses a single snapshot to
* fetch the list of children, so while more children may be getting
* added concurrently, whatever this function returns will be accurate
* as of some well-defined point in time.
*/
Move code for managing PartitionDescs into a new file, partdesc.c This is similar in spirit to the existing partbounds.c file in the same directory, except that there's a lot less code in the new file created by this commit. Pending work in this area proposes to add a bunch more code related to PartitionDescs, though, and this will give us a good place to put it. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZUwPf_uanjF==gTGBMJrn8uCq52XYvAEorNkLrUdoawg@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-21 17:38:54 +01:00
inhoids = find_inheritance_children(RelationGetRelid(rel), NoLock);
nparts = list_length(inhoids);
Allow ATTACH PARTITION with only ShareUpdateExclusiveLock. We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is weakened. To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process of building a PartitionDesc. If so, find_inheritance_children() might see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have been queued. To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there. Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return the same answer. The query planner will get confused if lookup up the PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent answer for the entire duration of query planning. Likewise, query execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a different PartitionDesc at different times. Invent a new PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency. This ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same view. Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it. For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some point. Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is started. We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a separate patch. There would still be a small window where a query that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without a full table lock. Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes. Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc are stable between planning and execution. So, add code so that if new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly. There does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added partitions. This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc. That currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc indexes between backends. Each backend will ignore the concurrently added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions. If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to share PartitionDescs across backends. There is a draft patch to serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch was discussed, which may be a useful place to start. Patch by me. Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs, Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro Herrera for some review. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
2019-03-07 17:13:12 +01:00
/* Allocate arrays for OIDs and boundspecs. */
Move code for managing PartitionDescs into a new file, partdesc.c This is similar in spirit to the existing partbounds.c file in the same directory, except that there's a lot less code in the new file created by this commit. Pending work in this area proposes to add a bunch more code related to PartitionDescs, though, and this will give us a good place to put it. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZUwPf_uanjF==gTGBMJrn8uCq52XYvAEorNkLrUdoawg@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-21 17:38:54 +01:00
if (nparts > 0)
{
oids = palloc(nparts * sizeof(Oid));
boundspecs = palloc(nparts * sizeof(PartitionBoundSpec *));
}
Allow ATTACH PARTITION with only ShareUpdateExclusiveLock. We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is weakened. To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process of building a PartitionDesc. If so, find_inheritance_children() might see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have been queued. To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there. Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return the same answer. The query planner will get confused if lookup up the PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent answer for the entire duration of query planning. Likewise, query execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a different PartitionDesc at different times. Invent a new PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency. This ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same view. Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it. For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some point. Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is started. We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a separate patch. There would still be a small window where a query that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without a full table lock. Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes. Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc are stable between planning and execution. So, add code so that if new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly. There does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added partitions. This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc. That currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc indexes between backends. Each backend will ignore the concurrently added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions. If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to share PartitionDescs across backends. There is a draft patch to serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch was discussed, which may be a useful place to start. Patch by me. Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs, Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro Herrera for some review. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
2019-03-07 17:13:12 +01:00
/* Collect bound spec nodes for each partition. */
Move code for managing PartitionDescs into a new file, partdesc.c This is similar in spirit to the existing partbounds.c file in the same directory, except that there's a lot less code in the new file created by this commit. Pending work in this area proposes to add a bunch more code related to PartitionDescs, though, and this will give us a good place to put it. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZUwPf_uanjF==gTGBMJrn8uCq52XYvAEorNkLrUdoawg@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-21 17:38:54 +01:00
i = 0;
foreach(cell, inhoids)
{
Oid inhrelid = lfirst_oid(cell);
HeapTuple tuple;
Allow ATTACH PARTITION with only ShareUpdateExclusiveLock. We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is weakened. To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process of building a PartitionDesc. If so, find_inheritance_children() might see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have been queued. To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there. Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return the same answer. The query planner will get confused if lookup up the PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent answer for the entire duration of query planning. Likewise, query execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a different PartitionDesc at different times. Invent a new PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency. This ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same view. Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it. For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some point. Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is started. We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a separate patch. There would still be a small window where a query that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without a full table lock. Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes. Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc are stable between planning and execution. So, add code so that if new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly. There does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added partitions. This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc. That currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc indexes between backends. Each backend will ignore the concurrently added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions. If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to share PartitionDescs across backends. There is a draft patch to serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch was discussed, which may be a useful place to start. Patch by me. Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs, Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro Herrera for some review. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
2019-03-07 17:13:12 +01:00
PartitionBoundSpec *boundspec = NULL;
Move code for managing PartitionDescs into a new file, partdesc.c This is similar in spirit to the existing partbounds.c file in the same directory, except that there's a lot less code in the new file created by this commit. Pending work in this area proposes to add a bunch more code related to PartitionDescs, though, and this will give us a good place to put it. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZUwPf_uanjF==gTGBMJrn8uCq52XYvAEorNkLrUdoawg@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-21 17:38:54 +01:00
Allow ATTACH PARTITION with only ShareUpdateExclusiveLock. We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is weakened. To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process of building a PartitionDesc. If so, find_inheritance_children() might see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have been queued. To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there. Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return the same answer. The query planner will get confused if lookup up the PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent answer for the entire duration of query planning. Likewise, query execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a different PartitionDesc at different times. Invent a new PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency. This ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same view. Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it. For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some point. Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is started. We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a separate patch. There would still be a small window where a query that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without a full table lock. Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes. Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc are stable between planning and execution. So, add code so that if new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly. There does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added partitions. This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc. That currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc indexes between backends. Each backend will ignore the concurrently added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions. If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to share PartitionDescs across backends. There is a draft patch to serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch was discussed, which may be a useful place to start. Patch by me. Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs, Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro Herrera for some review. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
2019-03-07 17:13:12 +01:00
/* Try fetching the tuple from the catcache, for speed. */
Move code for managing PartitionDescs into a new file, partdesc.c This is similar in spirit to the existing partbounds.c file in the same directory, except that there's a lot less code in the new file created by this commit. Pending work in this area proposes to add a bunch more code related to PartitionDescs, though, and this will give us a good place to put it. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZUwPf_uanjF==gTGBMJrn8uCq52XYvAEorNkLrUdoawg@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-21 17:38:54 +01:00
tuple = SearchSysCache1(RELOID, inhrelid);
Allow ATTACH PARTITION with only ShareUpdateExclusiveLock. We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is weakened. To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process of building a PartitionDesc. If so, find_inheritance_children() might see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have been queued. To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there. Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return the same answer. The query planner will get confused if lookup up the PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent answer for the entire duration of query planning. Likewise, query execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a different PartitionDesc at different times. Invent a new PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency. This ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same view. Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it. For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some point. Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is started. We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a separate patch. There would still be a small window where a query that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without a full table lock. Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes. Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc are stable between planning and execution. So, add code so that if new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly. There does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added partitions. This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc. That currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc indexes between backends. Each backend will ignore the concurrently added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions. If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to share PartitionDescs across backends. There is a draft patch to serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch was discussed, which may be a useful place to start. Patch by me. Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs, Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro Herrera for some review. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
2019-03-07 17:13:12 +01:00
if (HeapTupleIsValid(tuple))
{
Datum datum;
bool isnull;
datum = SysCacheGetAttr(RELOID, tuple,
Anum_pg_class_relpartbound,
&isnull);
if (!isnull)
boundspec = stringToNode(TextDatumGetCString(datum));
ReleaseSysCache(tuple);
}
/*
* The system cache may be out of date; if so, we may find no pg_class
* tuple or an old one where relpartbound is NULL. In that case, try
* the table directly. We can't just AcceptInvalidationMessages() and
* retry the system cache lookup because it's possible that a
* concurrent ATTACH PARTITION operation has removed itself to the
* ProcArray but yet added invalidation messages to the shared queue;
* InvalidateSystemCaches() would work, but seems excessive.
*
* Note that this algorithm assumes that PartitionBoundSpec we manage
* to fetch is the right one -- so this is only good enough for
* concurrent ATTACH PARTITION, not concurrent DETACH PARTITION
* or some hypothetical operation that changes the partition bounds.
*/
if (boundspec == NULL)
{
Relation pg_class;
SysScanDesc scan;
ScanKeyData key[1];
Datum datum;
bool isnull;
pg_class = table_open(RelationRelationId, AccessShareLock);
ScanKeyInit(&key[0],
Anum_pg_class_oid,
BTEqualStrategyNumber, F_OIDEQ,
ObjectIdGetDatum(inhrelid));
scan = systable_beginscan(pg_class, ClassOidIndexId, true,
NULL, 1, key);
tuple = systable_getnext(scan);
datum = heap_getattr(tuple, Anum_pg_class_relpartbound,
RelationGetDescr(pg_class), &isnull);
if (!isnull)
boundspec = stringToNode(TextDatumGetCString(datum));
systable_endscan(scan);
table_close(pg_class, AccessShareLock);
}
/* Sanity checks. */
if (!boundspec)
elog(ERROR, "missing relpartbound for relation %u", inhrelid);
Move code for managing PartitionDescs into a new file, partdesc.c This is similar in spirit to the existing partbounds.c file in the same directory, except that there's a lot less code in the new file created by this commit. Pending work in this area proposes to add a bunch more code related to PartitionDescs, though, and this will give us a good place to put it. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZUwPf_uanjF==gTGBMJrn8uCq52XYvAEorNkLrUdoawg@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-21 17:38:54 +01:00
if (!IsA(boundspec, PartitionBoundSpec))
elog(ERROR, "invalid relpartbound for relation %u", inhrelid);
/*
Allow ATTACH PARTITION with only ShareUpdateExclusiveLock. We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is weakened. To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process of building a PartitionDesc. If so, find_inheritance_children() might see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have been queued. To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there. Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return the same answer. The query planner will get confused if lookup up the PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent answer for the entire duration of query planning. Likewise, query execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a different PartitionDesc at different times. Invent a new PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency. This ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same view. Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it. For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some point. Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is started. We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a separate patch. There would still be a small window where a query that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without a full table lock. Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes. Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc are stable between planning and execution. So, add code so that if new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly. There does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added partitions. This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc. That currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc indexes between backends. Each backend will ignore the concurrently added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions. If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to share PartitionDescs across backends. There is a draft patch to serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch was discussed, which may be a useful place to start. Patch by me. Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs, Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro Herrera for some review. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
2019-03-07 17:13:12 +01:00
* If the PartitionBoundSpec says this is the default partition, its
* OID should match pg_partitioned_table.partdefid; if not, the
* catalog is corrupt.
Move code for managing PartitionDescs into a new file, partdesc.c This is similar in spirit to the existing partbounds.c file in the same directory, except that there's a lot less code in the new file created by this commit. Pending work in this area proposes to add a bunch more code related to PartitionDescs, though, and this will give us a good place to put it. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZUwPf_uanjF==gTGBMJrn8uCq52XYvAEorNkLrUdoawg@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-21 17:38:54 +01:00
*/
if (boundspec->is_default)
{
Oid partdefid;
partdefid = get_default_partition_oid(RelationGetRelid(rel));
if (partdefid != inhrelid)
elog(ERROR, "expected partdefid %u, but got %u",
inhrelid, partdefid);
}
Allow ATTACH PARTITION with only ShareUpdateExclusiveLock. We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is weakened. To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process of building a PartitionDesc. If so, find_inheritance_children() might see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have been queued. To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there. Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return the same answer. The query planner will get confused if lookup up the PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent answer for the entire duration of query planning. Likewise, query execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a different PartitionDesc at different times. Invent a new PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency. This ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same view. Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it. For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some point. Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is started. We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a separate patch. There would still be a small window where a query that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without a full table lock. Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes. Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc are stable between planning and execution. So, add code so that if new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly. There does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added partitions. This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc. That currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc indexes between backends. Each backend will ignore the concurrently added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions. If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to share PartitionDescs across backends. There is a draft patch to serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch was discussed, which may be a useful place to start. Patch by me. Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs, Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro Herrera for some review. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
2019-03-07 17:13:12 +01:00
/* Save results. */
Move code for managing PartitionDescs into a new file, partdesc.c This is similar in spirit to the existing partbounds.c file in the same directory, except that there's a lot less code in the new file created by this commit. Pending work in this area proposes to add a bunch more code related to PartitionDescs, though, and this will give us a good place to put it. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZUwPf_uanjF==gTGBMJrn8uCq52XYvAEorNkLrUdoawg@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-21 17:38:54 +01:00
oids[i] = inhrelid;
boundspecs[i] = boundspec;
++i;
}
/* Now build the actual relcache partition descriptor */
rel->rd_pdcxt = AllocSetContextCreate(CacheMemoryContext,
"partition descriptor",
ALLOCSET_DEFAULT_SIZES);
MemoryContextCopyAndSetIdentifier(rel->rd_pdcxt,
RelationGetRelationName(rel));
oldcxt = MemoryContextSwitchTo(rel->rd_pdcxt);
partdesc = (PartitionDescData *) palloc0(sizeof(PartitionDescData));
partdesc->nparts = nparts;
/* oids and boundinfo are allocated below. */
MemoryContextSwitchTo(oldcxt);
if (nparts == 0)
{
rel->rd_partdesc = partdesc;
return;
}
/* First create PartitionBoundInfo */
boundinfo = partition_bounds_create(boundspecs, nparts, key, &mapping);
/* Now copy boundinfo and oids into partdesc. */
oldcxt = MemoryContextSwitchTo(rel->rd_pdcxt);
partdesc->boundinfo = partition_bounds_copy(boundinfo, key);
partdesc->oids = (Oid *) palloc(partdesc->nparts * sizeof(Oid));
partdesc->is_leaf = (bool *) palloc(partdesc->nparts * sizeof(bool));
/*
* Now assign OIDs from the original array into mapped indexes of the
* result array. The order of OIDs in the former is defined by the
* catalog scan that retrieved them, whereas that in the latter is defined
* by canonicalized representation of the partition bounds.
*/
for (i = 0; i < partdesc->nparts; i++)
{
int index = mapping[i];
partdesc->oids[index] = oids[i];
/* Record if the partition is a leaf partition */
partdesc->is_leaf[index] =
Allow ATTACH PARTITION with only ShareUpdateExclusiveLock. We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is weakened. To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process of building a PartitionDesc. If so, find_inheritance_children() might see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have been queued. To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there. Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return the same answer. The query planner will get confused if lookup up the PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent answer for the entire duration of query planning. Likewise, query execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a different PartitionDesc at different times. Invent a new PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency. This ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same view. Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it. For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some point. Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is started. We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a separate patch. There would still be a small window where a query that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without a full table lock. Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes. Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc are stable between planning and execution. So, add code so that if new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly. There does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added partitions. This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc. That currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc indexes between backends. Each backend will ignore the concurrently added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions. If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to share PartitionDescs across backends. There is a draft patch to serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch was discussed, which may be a useful place to start. Patch by me. Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs, Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro Herrera for some review. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
2019-03-07 17:13:12 +01:00
(get_rel_relkind(oids[i]) != RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE);
Move code for managing PartitionDescs into a new file, partdesc.c This is similar in spirit to the existing partbounds.c file in the same directory, except that there's a lot less code in the new file created by this commit. Pending work in this area proposes to add a bunch more code related to PartitionDescs, though, and this will give us a good place to put it. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZUwPf_uanjF==gTGBMJrn8uCq52XYvAEorNkLrUdoawg@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-21 17:38:54 +01:00
}
MemoryContextSwitchTo(oldcxt);
rel->rd_partdesc = partdesc;
}
Allow ATTACH PARTITION with only ShareUpdateExclusiveLock. We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is weakened. To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process of building a PartitionDesc. If so, find_inheritance_children() might see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have been queued. To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there. Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return the same answer. The query planner will get confused if lookup up the PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent answer for the entire duration of query planning. Likewise, query execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a different PartitionDesc at different times. Invent a new PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency. This ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same view. Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it. For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some point. Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is started. We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a separate patch. There would still be a small window where a query that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without a full table lock. Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes. Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc are stable between planning and execution. So, add code so that if new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly. There does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added partitions. This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc. That currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc indexes between backends. Each backend will ignore the concurrently added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions. If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to share PartitionDescs across backends. There is a draft patch to serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch was discussed, which may be a useful place to start. Patch by me. Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs, Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro Herrera for some review. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
2019-03-07 17:13:12 +01:00
/*
* CreatePartitionDirectory
* Create a new partition directory object.
*/
PartitionDirectory
CreatePartitionDirectory(MemoryContext mcxt)
{
MemoryContext oldcontext = MemoryContextSwitchTo(mcxt);
PartitionDirectory pdir;
HASHCTL ctl;
MemSet(&ctl, 0, sizeof(HASHCTL));
ctl.keysize = sizeof(Oid);
ctl.entrysize = sizeof(PartitionDirectoryEntry);
ctl.hcxt = mcxt;
pdir = palloc(sizeof(PartitionDirectoryData));
pdir->pdir_mcxt = mcxt;
pdir->pdir_hash = hash_create("partition directory", 256, &ctl,
HASH_ELEM | HASH_BLOBS | HASH_CONTEXT);
MemoryContextSwitchTo(oldcontext);
return pdir;
}
/*
* PartitionDirectoryLookup
* Look up the partition descriptor for a relation in the directory.
*
* The purpose of this function is to ensure that we get the same
* PartitionDesc for each relation every time we look it up. In the
* face of current DDL, different PartitionDescs may be constructed with
* different views of the catalog state, but any single particular OID
* will always get the same PartitionDesc for as long as the same
* PartitionDirectory is used.
*/
PartitionDesc
PartitionDirectoryLookup(PartitionDirectory pdir, Relation rel)
{
PartitionDirectoryEntry *pde;
Oid relid = RelationGetRelid(rel);
bool found;
pde = hash_search(pdir->pdir_hash, &relid, HASH_ENTER, &found);
if (!found)
{
/*
* We must keep a reference count on the relation so that the
* PartitionDesc to which we are pointing can't get destroyed.
*/
RelationIncrementReferenceCount(rel);
pde->rel = rel;
pde->pd = RelationGetPartitionDesc(rel);
Assert(pde->pd != NULL);
}
return pde->pd;
}
/*
* DestroyPartitionDirectory
* Destroy a partition directory.
*
* Release the reference counts we're holding.
*/
void
DestroyPartitionDirectory(PartitionDirectory pdir)
{
HASH_SEQ_STATUS status;
PartitionDirectoryEntry *pde;
hash_seq_init(&status, pdir->pdir_hash);
while ((pde = hash_seq_search(&status)) != NULL)
RelationDecrementReferenceCount(pde->rel);
}
Move code for managing PartitionDescs into a new file, partdesc.c This is similar in spirit to the existing partbounds.c file in the same directory, except that there's a lot less code in the new file created by this commit. Pending work in this area proposes to add a bunch more code related to PartitionDescs, though, and this will give us a good place to put it. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZUwPf_uanjF==gTGBMJrn8uCq52XYvAEorNkLrUdoawg@mail.gmail.com
2019-02-21 17:38:54 +01:00
/*
* equalPartitionDescs
* Compare two partition descriptors for logical equality
*/
bool
equalPartitionDescs(PartitionKey key, PartitionDesc partdesc1,
PartitionDesc partdesc2)
{
int i;
if (partdesc1 != NULL)
{
if (partdesc2 == NULL)
return false;
if (partdesc1->nparts != partdesc2->nparts)
return false;
Assert(key != NULL || partdesc1->nparts == 0);
/*
* Same oids? If the partitioning structure did not change, that is,
* no partitions were added or removed to the relation, the oids array
* should still match element-by-element.
*/
for (i = 0; i < partdesc1->nparts; i++)
{
if (partdesc1->oids[i] != partdesc2->oids[i])
return false;
}
/*
* Now compare partition bound collections. The logic to iterate over
* the collections is private to partition.c.
*/
if (partdesc1->boundinfo != NULL)
{
if (partdesc2->boundinfo == NULL)
return false;
if (!partition_bounds_equal(key->partnatts, key->parttyplen,
key->parttypbyval,
partdesc1->boundinfo,
partdesc2->boundinfo))
return false;
}
else if (partdesc2->boundinfo != NULL)
return false;
}
else if (partdesc2 != NULL)
return false;
return true;
}
/*
* get_default_oid_from_partdesc
*
* Given a partition descriptor, return the OID of the default partition, if
* one exists; else, return InvalidOid.
*/
Oid
get_default_oid_from_partdesc(PartitionDesc partdesc)
{
if (partdesc && partdesc->boundinfo &&
partition_bound_has_default(partdesc->boundinfo))
return partdesc->oids[partdesc->boundinfo->default_index];
return InvalidOid;
}