postgresql/src/backend/access/nbtree/nbtsort.c

551 lines
16 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

/*-------------------------------------------------------------------------
* nbtsort.c
* Build a btree from sorted input by loading leaf pages sequentially.
*
* NOTES
*
* We use tuplesort.c to sort the given index tuples into order.
* Then we scan the index tuples in order and build the btree pages
* for each level. When we have only one page on a level, it must be the
* root -- it can be attached to the btree metapage and we are done.
*
* this code is moderately slow (~10% slower) compared to the regular
* btree (insertion) build code on sorted or well-clustered data. on
* random data, however, the insertion build code is unusable -- the
* difference on a 60MB heap is a factor of 15 because the random
* probes into the btree thrash the buffer pool. (NOTE: the above
* "10%" estimate is probably obsolete, since it refers to an old and
* not very good external sort implementation that used to exist in
* this module. tuplesort.c is almost certainly faster.)
*
* this code currently packs the pages to 100% of capacity. this is
* not wise, since *any* insertion will cause splitting. filling to
* something like the standard 70% steady-state load factor for btrees
* would probably be better.
*
*
* Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2000, PostgreSQL, Inc
* Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California
*
* IDENTIFICATION
2000-06-15 06:10:30 +02:00
* $Header: /cvsroot/pgsql/src/backend/access/nbtree/nbtsort.c,v 1.54 2000/06/15 04:09:36 momjian Exp $
*
*-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*/
#include "postgres.h"
#include "access/nbtree.h"
#include "utils/tuplesort.h"
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
/*
* turn on debugging output.
*
* XXX this code just does a numeric printf of the index key, so it's
* only really useful for integer keys.
*/
/*#define FASTBUILD_DEBUG*/
/*
* Status record for spooling.
*/
struct BTSpool
{
Tuplesortstate *sortstate; /* state data for tuplesort.c */
Relation index;
bool isunique;
};
#define BTITEMSZ(btitem) \
((btitem) ? \
(IndexTupleDSize((btitem)->bti_itup) + \
(sizeof(BTItemData) - sizeof(IndexTupleData))) : \
0)
static void _bt_load(Relation index, BTSpool *btspool);
static BTItem _bt_buildadd(Relation index, Size keysz, ScanKey scankey,
BTPageState *state, BTItem bti, int flags);
static BTItem _bt_minitem(Page opage, BlockNumber oblkno, int atend);
static BTPageState *_bt_pagestate(Relation index, int flags,
int level, bool doupper);
static void _bt_uppershutdown(Relation index, Size keysz, ScanKey scankey,
BTPageState *state);
/*
* Interface routines
*/
/*
* create and initialize a spool structure
*/
BTSpool *
_bt_spoolinit(Relation index, bool isunique)
{
BTSpool *btspool = (BTSpool *) palloc(sizeof(BTSpool));
1997-09-18 22:22:58 +02:00
MemSet((char *) btspool, 0, sizeof(BTSpool));
btspool->index = index;
btspool->isunique = isunique;
btspool->sortstate = tuplesort_begin_index(index, isunique, false);
/*
* Currently, tuplesort provides sort functions on IndexTuples. If we
* kept anything in a BTItem other than a regular IndexTuple, we'd
* need to modify tuplesort to understand BTItems as such.
*/
Assert(sizeof(BTItemData) == sizeof(IndexTupleData));
return btspool;
}
/*
* clean up a spool structure and its substructures.
*/
void
_bt_spooldestroy(BTSpool *btspool)
{
tuplesort_end(btspool->sortstate);
pfree((void *) btspool);
}
/*
* spool a btitem into the sort file.
*/
void
_bt_spool(BTItem btitem, BTSpool *btspool)
{
/* A BTItem is really just an IndexTuple */
tuplesort_puttuple(btspool->sortstate, (void *) btitem);
}
/*
* given a spool loaded by successive calls to _bt_spool,
* create an entire btree.
*/
void
_bt_leafbuild(BTSpool *btspool)
{
#ifdef BTREE_BUILD_STATS
if (Show_btree_build_stats)
{
fprintf(StatFp, "BTREE BUILD (Spool) STATISTICS\n");
ShowUsage();
ResetUsage();
}
#endif /* BTREE_BUILD_STATS */
tuplesort_performsort(btspool->sortstate);
_bt_load(btspool->index, btspool);
}
/*
* Internal routines.
*/
/*
* allocate a new, clean btree page, not linked to any siblings.
*/
static void
_bt_blnewpage(Relation index, Buffer *buf, Page *page, int flags)
{
BTPageOpaque opaque;
*buf = _bt_getbuf(index, P_NEW, BT_WRITE);
#ifdef NOT_USED
printf("\tblk=%d\n", BufferGetBlockNumber(*buf));
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
#endif
*page = BufferGetPage(*buf);
_bt_pageinit(*page, BufferGetPageSize(*buf));
opaque = (BTPageOpaque) PageGetSpecialPointer(*page);
opaque->btpo_prev = opaque->btpo_next = P_NONE;
opaque->btpo_flags = flags;
}
/*
* slide an array of ItemIds back one slot (from P_FIRSTKEY to
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
* P_HIKEY, overwriting P_HIKEY). we need to do this when we discover
* that we have built an ItemId array in what has turned out to be a
* P_RIGHTMOST page.
*/
static void
_bt_slideleft(Relation index, Buffer buf, Page page)
{
OffsetNumber off;
OffsetNumber maxoff;
ItemId previi;
ItemId thisii;
if (!PageIsEmpty(page))
{
maxoff = PageGetMaxOffsetNumber(page);
previi = PageGetItemId(page, P_HIKEY);
for (off = P_FIRSTKEY; off <= maxoff; off = OffsetNumberNext(off))
{
thisii = PageGetItemId(page, off);
*previi = *thisii;
previi = thisii;
}
((PageHeader) page)->pd_lower -= sizeof(ItemIdData);
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
}
}
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
/*
* allocate and initialize a new BTPageState. the returned structure
* is suitable for immediate use by _bt_buildadd.
*/
static BTPageState *
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
_bt_pagestate(Relation index, int flags, int level, bool doupper)
{
BTPageState *state = (BTPageState *) palloc(sizeof(BTPageState));
1997-09-18 22:22:58 +02:00
MemSet((char *) state, 0, sizeof(BTPageState));
_bt_blnewpage(index, &(state->btps_buf), &(state->btps_page), flags);
state->btps_firstoff = InvalidOffsetNumber;
state->btps_lastoff = P_HIKEY;
state->btps_lastbti = (BTItem) NULL;
state->btps_next = (BTPageState *) NULL;
state->btps_level = level;
state->btps_doupper = doupper;
return state;
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
}
/*
* return a copy of the minimum (P_HIKEY or P_FIRSTKEY) item on
* 'opage'. the copy is modified to point to 'opage' (as opposed to
* the page to which the item used to point, e.g., a heap page if
* 'opage' is a leaf page).
*/
static BTItem
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
_bt_minitem(Page opage, BlockNumber oblkno, int atend)
{
OffsetNumber off;
BTItem obti;
BTItem nbti;
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
off = atend ? P_HIKEY : P_FIRSTKEY;
obti = (BTItem) PageGetItem(opage, PageGetItemId(opage, off));
nbti = _bt_formitem(&(obti->bti_itup));
ItemPointerSet(&(nbti->bti_itup.t_tid), oblkno, P_HIKEY);
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
1998-09-01 05:29:17 +02:00
return nbti;
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
}
/*
* add an item to a disk page from a merge tape block.
*
* we must be careful to observe the following restrictions, placed
* upon us by the conventions in nbtsearch.c:
* - rightmost pages start data items at P_HIKEY instead of at
* P_FIRSTKEY.
* - duplicates cannot be split among pages unless the chain of
* duplicates starts at the first data item.
*
* a leaf page being built looks like:
*
* +----------------+---------------------------------+
* | PageHeaderData | linp0 linp1 linp2 ... |
* +-----------+----+---------------------------------+
* | ... linpN | ^ first |
* +-----------+--------------------------------------+
* | ^ last |
* | |
* | v last |
* +-------------+------------------------------------+
* | | itemN ... |
* +-------------+------------------+-----------------+
* | ... item3 item2 item1 | "special space" |
* +--------------------------------+-----------------+
* ^ first
*
* contrast this with the diagram in bufpage.h; note the mismatch
* between linps and items. this is because we reserve linp0 as a
* placeholder for the pointer to the "high key" item; when we have
* filled up the page, we will set linp0 to point to itemN and clear
* linpN.
*
* 'last' pointers indicate the last offset/item added to the page.
* 'first' pointers indicate the first offset/item that is part of a
* chain of duplicates extending from 'first' to 'last'.
*
* if all keys are unique, 'first' will always be the same as 'last'.
*/
static BTItem
_bt_buildadd(Relation index, Size keysz, ScanKey scankey,
BTPageState *state, BTItem bti, int flags)
{
Buffer nbuf;
Page npage;
BTItem last_bti;
OffsetNumber first_off;
OffsetNumber last_off;
OffsetNumber off;
Size pgspc;
Size btisz;
nbuf = state->btps_buf;
npage = state->btps_page;
first_off = state->btps_firstoff;
last_off = state->btps_lastoff;
last_bti = state->btps_lastbti;
pgspc = PageGetFreeSpace(npage);
btisz = BTITEMSZ(bti);
btisz = MAXALIGN(btisz);
/*
* Check whether the item can fit on a btree page at all. (Eventually,
* we ought to try to apply TOAST methods if not.) We actually need to
* be able to fit three items on every page, so restrict any one item
* to 1/3 the per-page available space. Note that at this point, btisz
* doesn't include the ItemId.
*
* NOTE: similar code appears in _bt_insertonpg() to defend against
* oversize items being inserted into an already-existing index. But
* during creation of an index, we don't go through there.
*/
if (btisz > (PageGetPageSize(npage) - sizeof(PageHeaderData) - MAXALIGN(sizeof(BTPageOpaqueData))) / 3 - sizeof(ItemIdData))
elog(ERROR, "btree: index item size %d exceeds maximum %ld",
btisz,
(PageGetPageSize(npage) - sizeof(PageHeaderData) - MAXALIGN(sizeof(BTPageOpaqueData))) /3 - sizeof(ItemIdData));
if (pgspc < btisz)
{
Buffer obuf = nbuf;
Page opage = npage;
OffsetNumber o,
n;
ItemId ii;
ItemId hii;
_bt_blnewpage(index, &nbuf, &npage, flags);
/*
* if 'last' is part of a chain of duplicates that does not start
* at the beginning of the old page, the entire chain is copied to
* the new page; we delete all of the duplicates from the old page
* except the first, which becomes the high key item of the old
* page.
*
* if the chain starts at the beginning of the page or there is no
* chain ('first' == 'last'), we need only copy 'last' to the new
* page. again, 'first' (== 'last') becomes the high key of the
* old page.
*
* note that in either case, we copy at least one item to the new
* page, so 'last_bti' will always be valid. 'bti' will never be
* the first data item on the new page.
*/
if (first_off == P_FIRSTKEY)
{
Assert(last_off != P_FIRSTKEY);
first_off = last_off;
}
for (o = first_off, n = P_FIRSTKEY;
o <= last_off;
o = OffsetNumberNext(o), n = OffsetNumberNext(n))
{
ii = PageGetItemId(opage, o);
if (PageAddItem(npage, PageGetItem(opage, ii),
ii->lp_len, n, LP_USED) == InvalidOffsetNumber)
elog(FATAL, "btree: failed to add item to the page in _bt_sort (1)");
#ifdef FASTBUILD_DEBUG
{
bool isnull;
BTItem tmpbti =
(BTItem) PageGetItem(npage, PageGetItemId(npage, n));
Datum d = index_getattr(&(tmpbti->bti_itup), 1,
index->rd_att, &isnull);
printf("_bt_buildadd: moved <%x> to offset %d at level %d\n",
d, n, state->btps_level);
}
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
#endif
}
/*
* this loop is backward because PageIndexTupleDelete shuffles the
* tuples to fill holes in the page -- by starting at the end and
* working back, we won't create holes (and thereby avoid
* shuffling).
*/
for (o = last_off; o > first_off; o = OffsetNumberPrev(o))
PageIndexTupleDelete(opage, o);
hii = PageGetItemId(opage, P_HIKEY);
ii = PageGetItemId(opage, first_off);
*hii = *ii;
ii->lp_flags &= ~LP_USED;
((PageHeader) opage)->pd_lower -= sizeof(ItemIdData);
first_off = P_FIRSTKEY;
last_off = PageGetMaxOffsetNumber(npage);
last_bti = (BTItem) PageGetItem(npage, PageGetItemId(npage, last_off));
/*
* set the page (side link) pointers.
*/
{
BTPageOpaque oopaque = (BTPageOpaque) PageGetSpecialPointer(opage);
BTPageOpaque nopaque = (BTPageOpaque) PageGetSpecialPointer(npage);
oopaque->btpo_next = BufferGetBlockNumber(nbuf);
nopaque->btpo_prev = BufferGetBlockNumber(obuf);
nopaque->btpo_next = P_NONE;
if (_bt_itemcmp(index, keysz, scankey,
(BTItem) PageGetItem(opage, PageGetItemId(opage, P_HIKEY)),
(BTItem) PageGetItem(opage, PageGetItemId(opage, P_FIRSTKEY)),
BTEqualStrategyNumber))
oopaque->btpo_flags |= BTP_CHAIN;
}
/*
* copy the old buffer's minimum key to its parent. if we don't
* have a parent, we have to create one; this adds a new btree
* level.
*/
if (state->btps_doupper)
{
BTItem nbti;
if (state->btps_next == (BTPageState *) NULL)
{
state->btps_next =
_bt_pagestate(index, 0, state->btps_level + 1, true);
}
nbti = _bt_minitem(opage, BufferGetBlockNumber(obuf), 0);
_bt_buildadd(index, keysz, scankey, state->btps_next, nbti, 0);
pfree((void *) nbti);
}
/*
* write out the old stuff. we never want to see it again, so we
* can give up our lock (if we had one; BuildingBtree is set, so
* we aren't locking).
*/
_bt_wrtbuf(index, obuf);
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
}
/*
* if this item is different from the last item added, we start a new
* chain of duplicates.
*/
off = OffsetNumberNext(last_off);
if (PageAddItem(npage, (Item) bti, btisz, off, LP_USED) == InvalidOffsetNumber)
elog(FATAL, "btree: failed to add item to the page in _bt_sort (2)");
#ifdef FASTBUILD_DEBUG
{
bool isnull;
Datum d = index_getattr(&(bti->bti_itup), 1, index->rd_att, &isnull);
printf("_bt_buildadd: inserted <%x> at offset %d at level %d\n",
d, off, state->btps_level);
}
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
#endif
if (last_bti == (BTItem) NULL)
first_off = P_FIRSTKEY;
else if (!_bt_itemcmp(index, keysz, scankey,
bti, last_bti, BTEqualStrategyNumber))
first_off = off;
last_off = off;
last_bti = (BTItem) PageGetItem(npage, PageGetItemId(npage, off));
state->btps_buf = nbuf;
state->btps_page = npage;
state->btps_lastbti = last_bti;
state->btps_lastoff = last_off;
state->btps_firstoff = first_off;
1998-09-01 05:29:17 +02:00
return last_bti;
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
}
static void
_bt_uppershutdown(Relation index, Size keysz, ScanKey scankey,
BTPageState *state)
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
{
BTPageState *s;
BlockNumber blkno;
BTPageOpaque opaque;
BTItem bti;
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
for (s = state; s != (BTPageState *) NULL; s = s->btps_next)
{
blkno = BufferGetBlockNumber(s->btps_buf);
opaque = (BTPageOpaque) PageGetSpecialPointer(s->btps_page);
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
/*
* if this is the root, attach it to the metapage. otherwise,
* stick the minimum key of the last page on this level (which has
* not been split, or else it wouldn't be the last page) into its
* parent. this may cause the last page of upper levels to split,
* but that's not a problem -- we haven't gotten to them yet.
*/
if (s->btps_doupper)
{
if (s->btps_next == (BTPageState *) NULL)
{
opaque->btpo_flags |= BTP_ROOT;
_bt_metaproot(index, blkno, s->btps_level + 1);
}
else
{
bti = _bt_minitem(s->btps_page, blkno, 0);
_bt_buildadd(index, keysz, scankey, s->btps_next, bti, 0);
pfree((void *) bti);
}
}
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
/*
* this is the rightmost page, so the ItemId array needs to be
* slid back one slot.
*/
_bt_slideleft(index, s->btps_buf, s->btps_page);
_bt_wrtbuf(index, s->btps_buf);
}
}
/*
* Read tuples in correct sort order from tuplesort, and load them into
* btree leaves.
*/
What looks like some *major* improvements to btree indexing... Patches from: aoki@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) i gave jolly my btree bulkload code a long, long time ago but never gave him a bunch of my bugfixes. here's a diff against the 6.0 baseline. for some reason, this code has slowed down somewhat relative to the insertion-build code on very small tables. don't know why -- it used to be within about 10%. anyway, here are some (highly unscientific!) timings on a dec 3000/300 for synthetic tables with 10k, 100k and 1000k tuples (basically, 1mb, 10mb and 100mb heaps). 'c' means clustered (pre-sorted) inputs and 'u' means unclustered (randomly ordered) inputs. the 10k table basically fits in the buffer pool, but the 100k and 1000k tables don't. as you can see, insertion build is fine if you've sorted your heaps on your index key or if your heap fits in core, but is absolutely horrible on unordered data (yes, that's 7.5 hours to index 100mb of data...) because of the zillions of random i/os. if it doesn't work for you for whatever reason, you can always turn it back off by flipping the FastBuild flag in nbtree.c. i don't have time to maintain it. good luck! baseline code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 8.6 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 9.1 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.2 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 652.4 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.1 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 26772.9 bulkloading code: time psql -c 'create index c10 on k10 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 11.3 time psql -c 'create index u10 on k10 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 10.4 time psql -c 'create index c100 on k100 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 59.5 time psql -c 'create index u100 on k100 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 63.5 time psql -c 'create index c1000 on k1000 using btree (c int4_ops)' bttest real 636.9 time psql -c 'create index u1000 on k1000 using btree (b int4_ops)' bttest real 701.0
1997-02-12 06:04:52 +01:00
static void
_bt_load(Relation index, BTSpool *btspool)
{
BTPageState *state;
ScanKey skey;
int natts;
BTItem bti;
bool should_free;
/*
* initialize state needed for the merge into the btree leaf pages.
*/
state = _bt_pagestate(index, BTP_LEAF, 0, true);
skey = _bt_mkscankey_nodata(index);
natts = RelationGetNumberOfAttributes(index);
for (;;)
{
bti = (BTItem) tuplesort_getindextuple(btspool->sortstate, true,
&should_free);
if (bti == (BTItem) NULL)
break;
_bt_buildadd(index, natts, skey, state, bti, BTP_LEAF);
if (should_free)
pfree((void *) bti);
}
_bt_uppershutdown(index, natts, skey, state);
_bt_freeskey(skey);
}