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

25 lines
784 B
C
Raw Normal View History

Move the handling of SELECT FOR UPDATE locking and rechecking out of execMain.c and into a new plan node type LockRows. Like the recent change to put table updating into a ModifyTable plan node, this increases planning flexibility by allowing the operations to occur below the top level of the plan tree. It's necessary in any case to restore the previous behavior of having FOR UPDATE locking occur before ModifyTable does. This partially refactors EvalPlanQual to allow multiple rows-under-test to be inserted into the EPQ machinery before starting an EPQ test query. That isn't sufficient to fix EPQ's general bogosity in the face of plans that return multiple rows per test row, though. Since this patch is mostly about getting some plan node infrastructure in place and not about fixing ten-year-old bugs, I will leave EPQ improvements for another day. Another behavioral change that we could now think about is doing FOR UPDATE before LIMIT, but that too seems like it should be treated as a followon patch.
2009-10-12 20:10:51 +02:00
/*-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*
* nodeLockRows.h
*
*
*
Update copyright for the year 2010.
2010-01-02 17:58:17 +01:00
* Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2010, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
Move the handling of SELECT FOR UPDATE locking and rechecking out of execMain.c and into a new plan node type LockRows. Like the recent change to put table updating into a ModifyTable plan node, this increases planning flexibility by allowing the operations to occur below the top level of the plan tree. It's necessary in any case to restore the previous behavior of having FOR UPDATE locking occur before ModifyTable does. This partially refactors EvalPlanQual to allow multiple rows-under-test to be inserted into the EPQ machinery before starting an EPQ test query. That isn't sufficient to fix EPQ's general bogosity in the face of plans that return multiple rows per test row, though. Since this patch is mostly about getting some plan node infrastructure in place and not about fixing ten-year-old bugs, I will leave EPQ improvements for another day. Another behavioral change that we could now think about is doing FOR UPDATE before LIMIT, but that too seems like it should be treated as a followon patch.
2009-10-12 20:10:51 +02:00
* Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California
*
Make NestLoop plan nodes pass outer-relation variables into their inner relation using the general PARAM_EXEC executor parameter mechanism, rather than the ad-hoc kluge of passing the outer tuple down through ExecReScan. The previous method was hard to understand and could never be extended to handle parameters coming from multiple join levels. This patch doesn't change the set of possible plans nor have any significant performance effect, but it's necessary infrastructure for future generalization of the concept of an inner indexscan plan. ExecReScan's second parameter is now unused, so it's removed.
2010-07-12 19:01:06 +02:00
* $PostgreSQL: pgsql/src/include/executor/nodeLockRows.h,v 1.3 2010/07/12 17:01:06 tgl Exp $
Move the handling of SELECT FOR UPDATE locking and rechecking out of execMain.c and into a new plan node type LockRows. Like the recent change to put table updating into a ModifyTable plan node, this increases planning flexibility by allowing the operations to occur below the top level of the plan tree. It's necessary in any case to restore the previous behavior of having FOR UPDATE locking occur before ModifyTable does. This partially refactors EvalPlanQual to allow multiple rows-under-test to be inserted into the EPQ machinery before starting an EPQ test query. That isn't sufficient to fix EPQ's general bogosity in the face of plans that return multiple rows per test row, though. Since this patch is mostly about getting some plan node infrastructure in place and not about fixing ten-year-old bugs, I will leave EPQ improvements for another day. Another behavioral change that we could now think about is doing FOR UPDATE before LIMIT, but that too seems like it should be treated as a followon patch.
2009-10-12 20:10:51 +02:00
*
*-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*/
#ifndef NODELOCKROWS_H
#define NODELOCKROWS_H
#include "nodes/execnodes.h"
extern LockRowsState *ExecInitLockRows(LockRows *node, EState *estate, int eflags);
extern TupleTableSlot *ExecLockRows(LockRowsState *node);
extern void ExecEndLockRows(LockRowsState *node);
Make NestLoop plan nodes pass outer-relation variables into their inner relation using the general PARAM_EXEC executor parameter mechanism, rather than the ad-hoc kluge of passing the outer tuple down through ExecReScan. The previous method was hard to understand and could never be extended to handle parameters coming from multiple join levels. This patch doesn't change the set of possible plans nor have any significant performance effect, but it's necessary infrastructure for future generalization of the concept of an inner indexscan plan. ExecReScan's second parameter is now unused, so it's removed.
2010-07-12 19:01:06 +02:00
extern void ExecReScanLockRows(LockRowsState *node);
Move the handling of SELECT FOR UPDATE locking and rechecking out of execMain.c and into a new plan node type LockRows. Like the recent change to put table updating into a ModifyTable plan node, this increases planning flexibility by allowing the operations to occur below the top level of the plan tree. It's necessary in any case to restore the previous behavior of having FOR UPDATE locking occur before ModifyTable does. This partially refactors EvalPlanQual to allow multiple rows-under-test to be inserted into the EPQ machinery before starting an EPQ test query. That isn't sufficient to fix EPQ's general bogosity in the face of plans that return multiple rows per test row, though. Since this patch is mostly about getting some plan node infrastructure in place and not about fixing ten-year-old bugs, I will leave EPQ improvements for another day. Another behavioral change that we could now think about is doing FOR UPDATE before LIMIT, but that too seems like it should be treated as a followon patch.
2009-10-12 20:10:51 +02:00
#endif /* NODELOCKROWS_H */