66c0185a3 adjusted the UNION planner to request that union child queries
produce Paths correctly ordered to implement the UNION by way of
MergeAppend followed by Unique. The code there made a bad assumption
that if the root->parent_root->parse had setOperations set that the
query must be the child subquery of a set operation. That's not true
when it comes to planning a non-inlined CTE which is parented by a set
operation. This causes issues as the CTE's targetlist has no
requirement to match up to the SetOperationStmt's groupClauses
Fix this by adding a new parameter to both subquery_planner() and
grouping_planner() to explicitly pass the SetOperationStmt only when
planning set operation child subqueries.
Thank you to Tom Lane for helping to rationalize the decision on the
best function signature for subquery_planner().
Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/242fc7c6-a8aa-2daf-ac4c-0a231e2619c1@gmail.com
Until now, UNION queries have often been suboptimal as the planner has
only ever considered using an Append node and making the results unique
by either using a Hash Aggregate, or by Sorting the entire Append result
and running it through the Unique operator. Both of these methods
always require reading all rows from the union subqueries.
Here we adjust the union planner so that it can request that each subquery
produce results in target list order so that these can be Merge Appended
together and made unique with a Unique node. This can improve performance
significantly as the union child can make use of the likes of btree
indexes and/or Merge Joins to provide the top-level UNION with presorted
input. This is especially good if the top-level UNION contains a LIMIT
node that limits the output rows to a small subset of the unioned rows as
cheap startup plans can be used.
Author: David Rowley
Reviewed-by: Richard Guo, Andy Fan
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvpb_63XQodmxKUF8vb9M7CxyUyT4sWvEgqeQU-GB7QFoQ@mail.gmail.com
Per buildfarm animal mylodon, the plan for this test was sometimes
swapping the join order for tenk1 and tenk2. Given that add_path() has
no code that would cause this fluctuation when given paths with consistent
costs, this indicates that the costs must be fluctuating in some runs.
The only proven reason I've seen where that could happen was slight
variations in pg_class.relpages for some tables. This was demonstrated to
be true by f03a9ca43 and related discussion. Manually adjusting tenk2's
pg_class.relpages by subtracting just 1 page does cause the plan to change
for this test.
Here we've not gone to the same lengths to prove that's what's going on
in this case. Proving that does not seem worth the time. Let's just
shrink one side of the join so the additional cost of the swapped join
order is sufficiently different that if the relpages estimate is off a few
pages that the planner still shouldn't swap the join order.
Reported-by: Thomas Munro
Author: Andy Fan, David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+hUKGLqC-NobKYfjxNM3Gexv9OJ-Fhvy9bugUcXsZjTqH7W=Q@mail.gmail.com
Most of these tests have been introduced in 6dd8b00807, to check for
behaviors related to hashing and hash plans, and money is a data type
with btree support but no hash functions. These tests are switched to
use varbit instead, to provide the same coverage.
Some other tests historically used money but don't really need it for
what they wanted to test (see rules.sql). Plans and coverage are
unchanged after the modifications done here.
Support for money may be removed a a later point, but this needs more
discussion.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18240-c5da758d7dc1ecf0@postgresql.org
While working on a8a968a82, I failed to consider that
cheapest_startup_path can be NULL when there is no non-parameterized
path in the pathlist. This is well documented in set_cheapest(), I just
failed to notice.
Here we adjust the code to just check if the RelOptInfo has a
cheapest_startup_path set before adding it to the startup_subpaths list.
Reported-by: Richard Guo
Author: Richard Guo
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMbWs49w3t03V69XhdCuw+GDwivny4uQUxrkVp6Gejaspt0wMQ@mail.gmail.com
6b94e7a6d did this for ordered append paths to allow fast startup
MergeAppends, however, nothing was done for the Append case.
Here we adjust add_paths_to_append_rel() to have it build an AppendPath
containing the cheapest startup paths from each of the child relations
when the append rel has "consider_startup" set.
Author: Andy Fan, David Rowley
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKU4AWrXSkUV=Pt-gRxQT7EbfUeNssprGyNsB=5mJibFZ6S3ww@mail.gmail.com
Commit 01e658fa74 added hash support for row types. This also added
support for hashing anonymous record types, using the same approach
that the type cache uses for comparison support for record types: It
just reports that it works, but it might fail at run time if a
component type doesn't actually support the operation. We get away
with that for comparison because most types support that. But some
types don't support hashing, so the current state can result in
failures at run time where the planner chooses hashing over sorting,
whereas that previously worked if only sorting was an option.
We do, however, want the record hashing support for path tracking in
recursive unions, and the SEARCH and CYCLE clauses built on that. In
that case, hashing is the only plan option. So enable that, this
commit implements the following approach: The type cache does not
report that hashing is available for the record type. This undoes
that part of 01e658fa74. Instead, callers that require hashing no
matter what can override that result themselves. This patch only
touches the callers to make the aforementioned recursive query cases
work, namely the parse analysis of unions, as well as the hash_array()
function.
Reported-by: Sait Talha Nisanci <sait.nisanci@microsoft.com>
Bug: #17158
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/17158-8a2ba823982537a4%40postgresql.org
Add hash functions for the record type as well as a hash operator
family and operator class for the record type. This enables all the
hash functionality for the record type such as hash-based plans for
UNION/INTERSECT/EXCEPT DISTINCT, recursive queries using UNION
DISTINCT, hash joins, and hash partitioning.
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/38eccd35-4e2d-6767-1b3c-dada1eac3124%402ndquadrant.com
- Test hashing of an array of a non-hashable element type.
- Test UNION [DISTINCT] with hash- and sort-based plans. (Previously,
only INTERSECT and EXCEPT where tested there.)
- Test UNION [DISTINCT] with a non-hashable column type. This
currently reverts to a sort-based plan even if enable_hashagg is on.
- Test UNION/INTERSECT/EXCEPT hash- and sort-based plans with arrays
as column types. Also test an array with a non-hashable element
type.
- Test UNION/INTERSECT/EXCEPT similarly with row types as column
types. Currently, this uses only sort-based plans because there is
no hashing support for row types.
- Add a test case that shows that recursive queries using UNION
[DISTINCT] require hashable column types.
- Add a currently failing test that uses UNION DISTINCT in a
cycle-detection use case using row types as column types.
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/38eccd35-4e2d-6767-1b3c-dada1eac3124%402ndquadrant.com
create_merge_append_plan failed to honor the CP_EXACT_TLIST flag:
it would generate the expected targetlist but then it felt free to
add resjunk sort targets to it. This demonstrably leads to assertion
failures in v11 and HEAD, and it's probably just accidental that we
don't see the same in older branches. I've not looked into whether
there would be any real-world consequences in non-assert builds.
In HEAD, create_append_plan has sprouted the same problem, so fix
that too (although we do not have any test cases that seem able to
reach that bug). This is an oversight in commit 3fc6e2d7f which
invented the CP_EXACT_TLIST flag, so back-patch to 9.6 where that
came in.
convert_subquery_pathkeys would create pathkeys for subquery output
values if they match any EquivalenceClass known in the outer query
and are available in the subquery's syntactic targetlist. However,
the second part of that condition is wrong, because such values might
not appear in the subquery relation's reltarget list, which would
mean that they couldn't be accessed above the level of the subquery
scan. We must check that they appear in the reltarget list, instead.
This can lead to dropping knowledge about the subquery's sort
ordering, but I believe it's okay, because any sort key that the
outer query actually has any interest in would appear in the
reltarget list.
This second issue is of very long standing, but right now there's no
evidence that it causes observable problems before 9.6, so I refrained
from back-patching further than that. We can revisit that choice if
somebody finds a way to make it cause problems in older branches.
(Developing useful test cases for these issues is really problematic;
fixing convert_subquery_pathkeys removes the only known way to exhibit
the create_merge_append_plan bug, and neither of the test cases added
by this patch causes a problem in all branches, even when considering
the issues separately.)
The second issue explains bug #15795 from Suresh Kumar R ("could not
find pathkey item to sort" with nested DISTINCT queries). I stumbled
across the first issue while investigating that.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15795-fadb56c8e44ee73c@postgresql.org
Since 9.4, we've allowed the syntax "select union select" and variants
of that. However, the planner wasn't expecting a no-column set operation
and ended up treating the set operation as if it were UNION ALL.
Turns out it's trivial to fix in v10 and later; we just need to be careful
about not generating a Sort node with no sort keys. However, since a weird
corner case like this is never going to be exercised by developers, we'd
better have thorough regression tests if we want to consider it supported.
Per report from Victor Yegorov.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAGnEbojGJrRSOgJwNGM7JSJZpVAf8xXcVPbVrGdhbVEHZ-BUMw@mail.gmail.com
Perusal of the code coverage report shows that the existing regression
test cases for INTERSECT and EXCEPT seemingly all prefer the SETOP_HASHED
implementation. Add some test cases in which we force use of the
SETOP_SORTED mode.
As reported by Sean Johnston in bug #14614, since 9.6 the planner can fail
due to trying to look up the referent of a Var with varno 0. This happens
because we generate such Vars in generate_append_tlist, for lack of any
better way to describe the output of a SetOp node. In typical situations
nothing really cares about that, but given nested set-operation queries
we will call estimate_num_groups on the output of the subquery, and that
wants to know what a Var actually refers to. That logic used to look at
subquery->targetList, but in commit 3fc6e2d7f I'd switched it to look at
subroot->processed_tlist, ie the actual output of the subquery plan not the
parser's idea of the result. It seemed like a good idea at the time :-(.
As a band-aid fix, change it back.
Really we ought to have an honest way of naming the outputs of SetOp steps,
which suggests that it'd be a good idea for the parser to emit an RTE
corresponding to each one. But that's a task for another day, and it
certainly wouldn't yield a back-patchable fix.
Report: https://postgr.es/m/20170407115808.25934.51866@wrigleys.postgresql.org
I'd somehow talked myself into believing that set_append_rel_size
doesn't need to worry about getting back an AND clause when it applies
eval_const_expressions to the result of adjust_appendrel_attrs (that is,
transposing the appendrel parent's restriction clauses for one child).
But that is nonsense, and Andreas Seltenreich's fuzz tester soon
turned up a counterexample. Put back the make_ands_implicit step
that was there before, and add a regression test covering the case.
Report: https://postgr.es/m/878tq6vja6.fsf@ansel.ydns.eu
Upcoming changes to the hash table code used, among others, for grouping
and set operations will change the output order for a few queries. To
make it less likely that actual bugs are hidden between regression test
ordering changes, and to make the tests robust against platform
dependant ordering, add ORDER BYs guaranteeing the output order.
As it's possible that some of the changes expose platform dependant
ordering, push this earlier, to let the buildfarm shake out potentially
unstable results.
Discussion: <20160727004333.r3e2k2y6fvk2ntup@alap3.anarazel.de>
Commit a87c729153 already fixed the bug this
is checking for, but the regression test case it added didn't cover this
scenario. Since we managed to miss the fact that there was a bug at all,
it seems like a good idea to propagate the extra test case forward to HEAD.
The original coding of EquivalenceClasses didn't foresee that appendrel
child relations might themselves be appendrels; but this is possible for
example when a UNION ALL subquery scans a table with inheritance children.
The oversight led to failure to optimize ordering-related issues very well
for the grandchild tables. After some false starts involving explicitly
flattening the appendrel representation, we found that this could be fixed
easily by removing a few implicit assumptions about appendrel parent rels
not being children themselves.
Kyotaro Horiguchi and Tom Lane, reviewed by Noah Misch
My tweak of these error messages in commit c359a1b082 contained the
thinko that a query would always have rowMarks set for a query
containing a locking clause. Not so: when declaring a cursor, for
instance, rowMarks isn't set at the point we're checking, so we'd be
dereferencing a NULL pointer.
The fix is to pass the lock strength to the function raising the error,
instead of trying to reverse-engineer it. The result not only is more
robust, but it also seems cleaner overall.
Per report from Robert Haas.
The code in set_append_rel_pathlist() for building parameterized paths
for append relations (inheritance and UNION ALL combinations) supposed
that the cheapest regular path for a child relation would still be cheapest
when reparameterized. Which might not be the case, particularly if the
added join conditions are expensive to compute, as in a recent example from
Jeff Janes. Fix it to compare child path costs *after* reparameterizing.
We can short-circuit that if the cheapest pre-existing path is already
parameterized correctly, which seems likely to be true often enough to be
worth checking for.
Back-patch to 9.2 where parameterized paths were introduced.
The planner is aware that it mustn't push down upper-level quals into
subqueries if the quals reference subquery output columns that contain
set-returning functions or volatile functions, or are non-DISTINCT outputs
of a DISTINCT ON subquery. However, it missed making this check when
there were one or more levels of UNION or INTERSECT above the dangerous
expression. This could lead to "set-valued function called in context that
cannot accept a set" errors, as seen in bug #8213 from Eric Soroos, or to
silently wrong answers in the other cases.
To fix, refactor the checks so that we make the column-is-unsafe checks
during subquery_is_pushdown_safe(), which already has to recursively
inspect all arms of a set-operation tree. This makes
qual_is_pushdown_safe() considerably simpler, at the cost that we will
spend some cycles checking output columns that possibly aren't referenced
in any upper qual. But the cases where this code gets executed at all
are already nontrivial queries, so it's unlikely anybody will notice any
slowdown of planning.
This has been broken since commit 05f916e6ad,
which makes the bug over ten years old. A bit surprising nobody noticed it
before now.
In commit 57664ed25e I tried to fix a bug
reported by Teodor Sigaev by making non-simple-Var output columns distinct
(by wrapping their expressions with dummy PlaceHolderVar nodes). This did
not work too well. Commit b28ffd0fcc fixed
some ensuing problems with matching to child indexes, but per a recent
report from Claus Stadler, constraint exclusion of UNION ALL subqueries was
still broken, because constant-simplification didn't handle the injected
PlaceHolderVars well either. On reflection, the original patch was quite
misguided: there is no reason to expect that EquivalenceClass child members
will be distinct. So instead of trying to make them so, we should ensure
that we can cope with the situation when they're not.
Accordingly, this patch reverts the code changes in the above-mentioned
commits (though the regression test cases they added stay). Instead, I've
added assorted defenses to make sure that duplicate EC child members don't
cause any problems. Teodor's original problem ("MergeAppend child's
targetlist doesn't match MergeAppend") is addressed more directly by
revising prepare_sort_from_pathkeys to let the parent MergeAppend's sort
list guide creation of each child's sort list.
In passing, get rid of add_sort_column; as far as I can tell, testing for
duplicate sort keys at this stage is dead code. Certainly it doesn't
trigger often enough to be worth expending cycles on in ordinary queries.
And keeping the test would've greatly complicated the new logic in
prepare_sort_from_pathkeys, because comparing pathkey list entries against
a previous output array requires that we not skip any entries in the list.
Back-patch to 9.1, like the previous patches. The only known issue in
this area that wasn't caused by the ill-advised previous patches was the
MergeAppend planning failure, which of course is not relevant before 9.1.
It's possible that we need some of the new defenses against duplicate child
EC entries in older branches, but until there's some clear evidence of that
I'm going to refrain from back-patching further.
In commit 57664ed25e, I made the planner
wrap non-simple-variable outputs of appendrel children (IOW, child SELECTs
of UNION ALL subqueries) inside PlaceHolderVars, in order to solve some
issues with EquivalenceClass processing. However, this means that any
upper-level WHERE clauses mentioning such outputs will now contain
PlaceHolderVars after they're pushed down into the appendrel child,
and that prevents indxpath.c from recognizing that they could be matched
to index expressions. To fix, add explicit stripping of PlaceHolderVars
from index operands, same as we have long done for RelabelType nodes.
Add a regression test covering both this and the plain-UNION case (which
is a totally different code path, but should also be able to do it).
Per bug #6416 from Matteo Beccati. Back-patch to 9.1, same as the
previous change.
presented with an UNKNOWN-type Var, which can happen in cases where an
unknown literal appeared in a subquery. While many such cases will fail
later on anyway in the planner, there are some cases where the planner is
able to flatten the query and replace the Var by the constant before it has
to coerce the union column to the final type. I had added this check in 8.4
to provide earlier/better error detection, but it causes a regression for
some cases that worked OK before. Fix by not making the check if the input
node is UNKNOWN type and not a Const or Param. If it isn't going to work,
it will fail anyway at plan time, with the only real loss being inability to
provide an error cursor. Per gripe from Britt Piehler.
In passing, rename a couple of variables to remove confusion from an
inner scope masking the same variable names in an outer scope.
This completes my project of improving usage of hashing for duplicate
elimination (aggregate functions with DISTINCT remain undone, but that's
for some other day).
As with the previous patches, this means we can INTERSECT/EXCEPT on datatypes
that can hash but not sort, and it means that INTERSECT/EXCEPT without ORDER
BY are no longer certain to produce sorted output.
but seem like a separate patch since most of the remaining work is on the
executor side.) I took the opportunity to push selection of the grouping
operators for set operations into the parser where it belongs. Otherwise this
is just a small exercise in making prepunion.c consider both alternatives.
As with the recent DISTINCT patch, this means we can UNION on datatypes that
can hash but not sort, and it means that UNION without ORDER BY is no longer
certain to produce sorted output.
blanks, in hopes of reducing the surprise factor for newbies. Remove
redundant operators for VARCHAR (it depends wholly on TEXT operations now).
Clean up resolution of ambiguous operators/functions to avoid surprising
choices for domains: domains are treated as equivalent to their base types
and binary-coercibility is no longer considered a preference item when
choosing among multiple operators/functions. IsBinaryCoercible now correctly
reflects the notion that you need *only* relabel the type to get from type
A to type B: that is, a domain is binary-coercible to its base type, but
not vice versa. Various marginal cleanup, including merging the essentially
duplicate resolution code in parse_func.c and parse_oper.c. Improve opr_sanity
regression test to understand about binary compatibility (using pg_cast),
and fix a couple of small errors in the catalogs revealed thereby.
Restructure "special operator" handling to fetch operators via index opclasses
rather than hardwiring assumptions about names (cleans up the pattern_ops
stuff a little).
SQL92 semantics, including support for ALL option. All three can be used
in subqueries and views. DISTINCT and ORDER BY work now in views, too.
This rewrite fixes many problems with cross-datatype UNIONs and INSERT/SELECT
where the SELECT yields different datatypes than the INSERT needs. I did
that by making UNION subqueries and SELECT in INSERT be treated like
subselects-in-FROM, thereby allowing an extra level of targetlist where the
datatype conversions can be inserted safely.
INITDB NEEDED!
David Rowley
Michael Paquier
Peter Eisentraut
Tom Lane
Andres Freund
Alvaro Herrera
Thomas G. Lockhart