Currently, in read committed transaction isolation mode (default), we have the
following sequence of actions when tuple_update()/tuple_delete() finds
the tuple updated by concurrent transaction.
1. Attempt to update/delete tuple with tuple_update()/tuple_delete(), which
returns TM_Updated.
2. Lock tuple with tuple_lock().
3. Re-evaluate plan qual (recheck if we still need to update/delete and
calculate the new tuple for update).
4. Second attempt to update/delete tuple with tuple_update()/tuple_delete().
This attempt should be successful, since the tuple was previously locked.
This patch eliminates step 2 by taking the lock during first
tuple_update()/tuple_delete() call. Heap table access method saves some
efforts by checking the updated tuple once instead of twice. Future
undo-based table access methods, which will start from the latest row version,
can immediately place a lock there.
The code in nodeModifyTable.c is simplified by removing the nested switch/case.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPpHfdua-YFw3XTprfutzGp28xXLigFtzNbuFY8yPhqeq6X5kg%40mail.gmail.com
Reviewed-by: Aleksander Alekseev, Pavel Borisov, Vignesh C, Mason Sharp
Reviewed-by: Andres Freund, Chris Travers
Add a script to automatically generate the node support functions
(copy, equal, out, and read, as well as the node tags enum) from the
struct definitions.
For each of the four node support files, it creates two include files,
e.g., copyfuncs.funcs.c and copyfuncs.switch.c, to include in the main
file. All the scaffolding of the main file stays in place.
I have tried to mostly make the coverage of the output match what is
currently there. For example, one could now do out/read coverage of
utility statement nodes, but I have manually excluded those for now.
The reason is mainly that it's easier to diff the before and after,
and adding a bunch of stuff like this might require a separate
analysis and review.
Subtyping (TidScan -> Scan) is supported.
For the hard cases, you can just write a manual function and exclude
generating one. For the not so hard cases, there is a way of
annotating struct fields to get special behaviors. For example,
pg_node_attr(equal_ignore) has the field ignored in equal functions.
(In this patch, I have only ifdef'ed out the code to could be removed,
mainly so that it won't constantly have merge conflicts. It will be
deleted in a separate patch. All the code comments that are worth
keeping from those sections have already been moved to the header
files where the structs are defined.)
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/c1097590-a6a4-486a-64b1-e1f9cc0533ce%40enterprisedb.com
Avoid creating transiently-inconsistent slot states where possible,
by not setting TTS_FLAG_SHOULDFREE until after the slot actually has
a free'able tuple pointer, and by making sure that we reset tts_nvalid
and related derived state before we replace the tuple contents. This
would only matter if something were to examine the slot after we'd
suffered some kind of error (e.g. out of memory) while manipulating
the slot. We typically don't do that, so these changes might just be
cosmetic --- but even if so, it seems like good future-proofing.
Also remove some redundant Asserts, and add a couple for consistency.
Back-patch to v12 where all this code was rewritten.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16095-c3ff2e5283b8dba5@postgresql.org
When ExecBRUpdateTriggers()'s GetTupleForTrigger() follows an EPQ
chain the former needs to run the result tuple through the junkfilter
again, and update the slot containing the new version of the tuple to
contain that new version. The input tuple may already be in the
junkfilter's output slot, which used to be OK - we don't need the
previous version anymore. Unfortunately ff11e7f4b9 started to use
ExecCopySlot() to update newslot, and ExecCopySlot() doesn't support
copying a slot into itself, leading to a slot in a corrupt
state, which then can cause crashes or other symptoms.
Fix this by skipping the ExecCopySlot() when copying into itself.
While we could have easily made ExecCopySlot() handle that case, it
seems better to add an assert forbidding doing so instead. As the goal
of copying might be to make the contents of one slot independent from
another, it seems failure prone to handle doing so silently.
A follow-up commit will add tests for the obviously under-covered
combination of EPQ and triggers. Done as a separate commit as it might
make sense to backpatch them further than this bug.
Also remove confusion with confusing variable names for slots in
ExecBRDeleteTriggers() and ExecBRUpdateTriggers().
Bug: #16036
Reported-By: Антон Власов
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16036-28184c90d952fb7f@postgresql.org
Backpatch: 12-, where ff11e7f4b9 was merged
This is still using the 2.0 version of pg_bsd_indent.
I thought it would be good to commit this separately,
so as to document the differences between 2.0 and 2.1 behavior.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16296.1558103386@sss.pgh.pa.us
As reported by Tom, when ExecStoreMinimalTuple() had to perform a
conversion to store the minimal tuple in the slot, it forgot to
respect the shouldFree flag, and leaked the tuple into the current
memory context if true. Fix that by freeing the tuple in that case.
Looking at the relevant code made me (Andres) realize that not having
the shouldFree parameter to ExecForceStoreHeapTuple() was a bad
idea. Some callers had to locally implement the necessary logic, and
in one case it was missing, creating a potential per-group leak in
non-hashed aggregation.
The choice to not free the tuple in ExecComputeStoredGenerated() is
not pretty, but not introduced by this commit - I'll start a separate
discussion about it.
Reported-By: Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/366.1555382816@sss.pgh.pa.us
For the upcoming pluggable table access methods it's quite
inconvenient to store tuples as HeapTuples, as that'd require
converting tuples from a their native format into HeapTuples. Instead
use slots to manage epq tuples.
To fit into that scheme, change the foreign data wrapper callback
RefetchForeignRow, to store the tuple in a slot. Insist on using the
caller provided slot, so it conveniently can be stored in the
corresponding EPQ slot. As there is no in core user of
RefetchForeignRow, that change was done blindly, but we plan to test
that soon.
To avoid duplicating that work for row locks, move row locks to just
directly use the EPQ slots - it previously temporarily stored tuples
in LockRowsState.lr_curtuples, but that doesn't seem beneficial, given
we'd possibly end up with a significant number of additional slots.
The behaviour of es_epqTupleSet[rti -1] is now checked by
es_epqTupleSlot[rti -1] != NULL, as that is distinguishable from a
slot containing an empty tuple.
Author: Andres Freund, Haribabu Kommi, Ashutosh Bapat
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180703070645.wchpu5muyto5n647@alap3.anarazel.de
After the introduction of tuple table slots all table AMs need to
support returning the table oid of the tuple stored in a slot created
by said AM. It does not make sense to re-implement that in every AM,
therefore move handling of table OIDs into the TupleTableSlot
structure itself. It's possible that we, at a later date, might want
to get rid of HeapTupleData.t_tableOid entirely, but doing so before
the abstractions for table AMs are integrated turns out to be too
hard, so delay that for now.
Similarly, every AM needs to support the concept of a tuple
identifier (tid / item pointer) for its tuples. It's quite possible
that we'll generalize the exact form of a tid at a future point (to
allow for things like index organized tables), but for now many parts
of the code know about tids, so there's not much point in abstracting
tids away. Therefore also move into slot (rather than providing API to
set/get the tid associated with the tuple in a slot).
Once table AM includes insert/updating/deleting tuples, the
responsibility to set the correct tid after such an action will move
into that. After that change, code doing such modifications, should
not have to deal with HeapTuples directly anymore.
Author: Andres Freund, Haribabu Kommi and Ashutosh Bapat
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180703070645.wchpu5muyto5n647@alap3.anarazel.de
That avoids having to care about the lifetime of the
HeapTupleHeaderData passed to ExecStore[Buffer]HeapTuple(). That
doesn't make a huge difference for a plain HeapTupleTableSlot, but for
BufferHeapTupleTableSlot it can be a significant advantage, avoiding
the need to materialize slots where it's inconvenient to provide a
HeapTupleData with appropriate lifetime to point to the on-disk tuple.
It's quite possible that we'll want to add support functions for
constructing HeapTuples using that embedded HeapTupleData, but for now
callers do so themselves.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180703070645.wchpu5muyto5n647@alap3.anarazel.de
This allows to avoid an unnecessary pin/unpin cycle when storing a
tuple in an already pinned buffer into a slot, when the pin isn't
further needed at the call site.
Only a single caller for now (to ensure coverage), but upcoming
patches will increase use of the new function.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180703070645.wchpu5muyto5n647@alap3.anarazel.de
This commit completes the work prepared in 1a0586de36, splitting the
old TupleTableSlot implementation (which could store buffer, heap,
minimal and virtual slots) into four different slot types. As
described in the aforementioned commit, this is done with the goal of
making tuple table slots extensible, to allow for pluggable table
access methods.
To achieve runtime extensibility for TupleTableSlots, operations on
slots that can differ between types of slots are performed using the
TupleTableSlotOps struct provided at slot creation time. That
includes information from the size of TupleTableSlot struct to be
allocated, initialization, deforming etc. See the struct's definition
for more detailed information about callbacks TupleTableSlotOps.
I decided to rename TTSOpsBufferTuple to TTSOpsBufferHeapTuple and
ExecCopySlotTuple to ExecCopySlotHeapTuple, as that seems more
consistent with other naming introduced in recent patches.
There's plenty optimization potential in the slot implementation, but
according to benchmarking the state after this commit has similar
performance characteristics to before this set of changes, which seems
sufficient.
There's a few changes in execReplication.c that currently need to poke
through the slot abstraction, that'll be repaired once the pluggable
storage patchset provides the necessary infrastructure.
Author: Andres Freund and Ashutosh Bapat, with changes by Amit Khandekar
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181105210039.hh4vvi4vwoq5ba2q@alap3.anarazel.de
Upcoming work intends to allow pluggable ways to introduce new ways of
storing table data. Accessing those table access methods from the
executor requires TupleTableSlots to be carry tuples in the native
format of such storage methods; otherwise there'll be a significant
conversion overhead.
Different access methods will require different data to store tuples
efficiently (just like virtual, minimal, heap already require fields
in TupleTableSlot). To allow that without requiring additional pointer
indirections, we want to have different structs (embedding
TupleTableSlot) for different types of slots. Thus different types of
slots are needed, which requires adapting creators of slots.
The slot that most efficiently can represent a type of tuple in an
executor node will often depend on the type of slot a child node
uses. Therefore we need to track the type of slot is returned by
nodes, so parent slots can create slots based on that.
Relatedly, JIT compilation of tuple deforming needs to know which type
of slot a certain expression refers to, so it can create an
appropriate deforming function for the type of tuple in the slot.
But not all nodes will only return one type of slot, e.g. an append
node will potentially return different types of slots for each of its
subplans.
Therefore add function that allows to query the type of a node's
result slot, and whether it'll always be the same type (whether it's
fixed). This can be queried using ExecGetResultSlotOps().
The scan, result, inner, outer type of slots are automatically
inferred from ExecInitScanTupleSlot(), ExecInitResultSlot(),
left/right subtrees respectively. If that's not correct for a node,
that can be overwritten using new fields in PlanState.
This commit does not introduce the actually abstracted implementation
of different kind of TupleTableSlots, that will be left for a followup
commit. The different types of slots introduced will, for now, still
use the same backing implementation.
While this already partially invalidates the big comment in
tuptable.h, it seems to make more sense to update it later, when the
different TupleTableSlot implementations actually exist.
Author: Ashutosh Bapat and Andres Freund, with changes by Amit Khandekar
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181105210039.hh4vvi4vwoq5ba2q@alap3.anarazel.de
Previously materializing a slot always returned a HeapTuple. As
current work aims to reduce the reliance on HeapTuples (so other
storage systems can work efficiently), that needs to change. Thus
split the tasks of materializing a slot (i.e. making it independent
from the underlying storage / other memory contexts) from fetching a
HeapTuple from the slot. For brevity, allow to fetch a HeapTuple from
a slot and materializing the slot at the same time, controlled by a
parameter.
For now some callers of ExecFetchSlotHeapTuple, with materialize =
true, expect that changes to the heap tuple will be reflected in the
underlying slot. Those places will be adapted in due course, so while
not pretty, that's OK for now.
Also rename ExecFetchSlotTuple to ExecFetchSlotHeapTupleDatum and
ExecFetchSlotTupleDatum to ExecFetchSlotHeapTupleDatum, as it's likely
that future storage methods will need similar methods. There already
is ExecFetchSlotMinimalTuple, so the new names make the naming scheme
more coherent.
Author: Ashutosh Bapat and Andres Freund, with changes by Amit Khandekar
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181105210039.hh4vvi4vwoq5ba2q@alap3.anarazel.de
There's several reasons for this change:
1) It reduces the total size of TupleTableSlot / reduces alignment
padding, making the commonly accessed members fit into a single
cacheline (but we currently do not force proper alignment, so
that's not yet guaranteed to be helpful)
2) Combining the booleans into a flag allows to combine read/writes
from memory.
3) With the upcoming slot abstraction changes, it allows to have core
and extended flags, in a memory efficient way.
Author: Ashutosh Bapat and Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180220224318.gw4oe5jadhpmcdnm@alap3.anarazel.de
heaptuple.c was never a particular good fit for slot_getattr(),
slot_getsomeattrs() and slot_getmissingattrs(), but in upcoming
changes slots will be made more abstract (allowing slots that contain
different types of tuples), making it clearly the wrong place.
Note that slot_deform_tuple() remains in it's current place, as it
clearly deals with a HeapTuple. getmissingattrs() also remains, but
it's less clear that that's correct - but execTuples.c wouldn't be the
right place.
Author: Ashutosh Bapat.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180220224318.gw4oe5jadhpmcdnm@alap3.anarazel.de
Upcoming changes introduce further types of tuple table slots, in
preparation of making table storage pluggable. New storage methods
will have different representation of tuples, therefore the slot
accessor should refer explicitly to heap tuples.
Instead of just renaming the functions, split it into one function
that accepts heap tuples not residing in buffers, and one accepting
ones in buffers. Previously one function was used for both, but that
was a bit awkward already, and splitting will allow us to represent
slot types for tuples in buffers and normal memory separately.
This is split out from the patch introducing abstract slots, as this
largely consists out of mechanical changes.
Author: Ashutosh Bapat
Reviewed-By: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180220224318.gw4oe5jadhpmcdnm@alap3.anarazel.de
Previously it was an int / 4 bytes. The maximum number of attributes
in a tuple is restricted by the maximum value Var->varattno, which is
an AttrNumber/int16. Hence use the same data type for
TupleTableSlot->tts_nvalid.
Author: Ashutosh Bapat
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180220224318.gw4oe5jadhpmcdnm@alap3.anarazel.de
For some reason pg_waldump is including tuptable.h, and the recent
addition of a static inline function to it is causing problems on
older buildfarm members that fail to optimize such functions away
completely. I wonder if this situation doesn't mean that some header
refactoring is called for ... but as a band-aid, wrap the static
function in "#ifndef FRONTEND".
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180824154237.mabsv6fsz5q37bma@alap3.anarazel.de
Code in slot_getallattrs() is the same as if slot_getsomeattrs() is
called with number of attributes specified in the tuple
descriptor. Implement it that way instead of duplicating the code
between those two functions.
This is part of a patchseries abstracting TupleTableSlots so they can
store arbitrary forms of tuples, but is a nice enough cleanup on its
own.
Author: Ashutosh Bapat
Reviewed-By: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180220224318.gw4oe5jadhpmcdnm@alap3.anarazel.de
Instead using memset to set tts_isnull, call the new
slot_getmissingattrs().
Also fix a bug (= instead of >=) in the code generation. Normally = is
correct, but when repeatedly deforming fields not in a
tuple (e.g. deform up to natts + 1 and then natts + 2) >= is needed.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180328010053.i2qvsuuusst4lgmc@alap3.anarazel.de
For any interesting JIT target, fields inside structs need to be
accessed. b96d550e contains infrastructure for syncing the definition
of types between postgres C code and runtime code generation with
LLVM. But that doesn't sync the number or names of fields inside
structs, just the types (including padding etc).
One option would be to hardcode the offset numbers in the JIT code,
but that'd be hard to keep in sync. Instead add macros indicating the
field offset to the fields that need to be accessed. Not pretty, but
manageable.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170901064131.tazjxwus3k2w3ybh@alap3.anarazel.de
"UPDATE/DELETE WHERE CURRENT OF cursor_name" failed, with an error message
like "cannot extract system attribute from virtual tuple", if the cursor
was using a index-only scan for the target table. Fix it by digging the
current TID out of the indexscan state.
It seems likely that the same failure could occur for CustomScan plans
and perhaps some FDW plan types, so that leaving this to be treated as an
internal error with an obscure message isn't as good an idea as it first
seemed. Hence, add a bit of heaptuple.c infrastructure to let us deliver
a more on-topic message. I chose to make the message match what you get
for the case where execCurrentOf can't identify the target scan node at
all, "cursor "foo" is not a simply updatable scan of table "bar"".
Perhaps it should be different, but we can always adjust that later.
In the future, it might be nice to provide hooks that would let custom
scan providers and/or FDWs deal with this in other ways; but that's
not a suitable topic for a back-patchable bug fix.
It's been like this all along, so back-patch to all supported branches.
Yugo Nagata and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180201013349.937dfc5f.nagata@sraoss.co.jp
Previously tts_off was, for unknown reasons, of type long. For one
that's unnecessary as tuples are restricted in length, for another
long would be a bad choice of type even if that weren't the case, as
it's not reliably wider than an int. Also HeapTupleHeader->t_len is a
uint32.
This is split off from a larger patch implementing JITed tuple
deforming. Seems like an independent improvement, as tiny as it is.
Author: Andres Freund
The reason for doing so is that it will allow expression evaluation to
optimize based on the underlying tupledesc. In particular it will
allow to JIT tuple deforming together with the expression itself.
For that expression initialization needs to be moved after the
relevant slots are initialized - mostly unproblematic, except in the
case of nodeWorktablescan.c.
After doing so there's no need for ExecAssignResultType() and
ExecAssignResultTypeFromTL() anymore, as all former callers have been
converted to create a slot with a fixed descriptor.
When creating a slot with a fixed descriptor, tts_values/isnull can be
allocated together with the main slot, reducing allocation overhead
and increasing cache density a bit.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20171206093717.vqdxe5icqttpxs3p@alap3.anarazel.de
The lower case spellings are C and C++ standard and are used in most
parts of the PostgreSQL sources. The upper case spellings are only used
in some files/modules. So standardize on the standard spellings.
The APIs for ICU, Perl, and Windows define their own TRUE and FALSE, so
those are left as is when using those APIs.
In code comments, we use the lower-case spelling for the C concepts and
keep the upper-case spelling for the SQL concepts.
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Change pg_bsd_indent to follow upstream rules for placement of comments
to the right of code, and remove pgindent hack that caused comments
following #endif to not obey the general rule.
Commit e3860ffa4d wasn't actually using
the published version of pg_bsd_indent, but a hacked-up version that
tried to minimize the amount of movement of comments to the right of
code. The situation of interest is where such a comment has to be
moved to the right of its default placement at column 33 because there's
code there. BSD indent has always moved right in units of tab stops
in such cases --- but in the previous incarnation, indent was working
in 8-space tab stops, while now it knows we use 4-space tabs. So the
net result is that in about half the cases, such comments are placed
one tab stop left of before. This is better all around: it leaves
more room on the line for comment text, and it means that in such
cases the comment uniformly starts at the next 4-space tab stop after
the code, rather than sometimes one and sometimes two tabs after.
Also, ensure that comments following #endif are indented the same
as comments following other preprocessor commands such as #else.
That inconsistency turns out to have been self-inflicted damage
from a poorly-thought-through post-indent "fixup" in pgindent.
This patch is much less interesting than the first round of indent
changes, but also bulkier, so I thought it best to separate the effects.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1dAmxK-0006EE-1r@gemulon.postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/30527.1495162840@sss.pgh.pa.us
If a plan node output expression returns an "expanded" datum, and that
output column is referenced in more than one place in upper-level plan
nodes, we need to ensure that what is returned is a read-only reference
not a read/write reference. Otherwise one of the referencing sites could
scribble on or even delete the expanded datum before we have evaluated the
others. Commit 1dc5ebc907, which introduced this feature, supposed
that it'd be sufficient to make SubqueryScan nodes force their output
columns to read-only state. The folly of that was revealed by bug #14174
from Andrew Gierth, and really should have been immediately obvious
considering that the planner will happily optimize SubqueryScan nodes
out of the plan without any regard for this issue.
The safest fix seems to be to make ExecProject() force its results into
read-only state; that will cover every case where a plan node returns
expression results. Actually we can delegate this to ExecTargetList()
since we can recursively assume that plain Vars will not reference
read-write datums. That should keep the extra overhead down to something
minimal. We no longer need ExecMakeSlotContentsReadOnly(), which was
introduced only in support of the idea that just a few plan node types
would need to do this.
In the future it would be nice to have the planner account for this problem
and inject force-to-read-only expression evaluation nodes into only the
places where there's a risk of multiple evaluation. That's not a suitable
solution for 9.5 or even 9.6 at this point, though.
Report: <20160603124628.9932.41279@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
This patch introduces the ability for complex datatypes to have an
in-memory representation that is different from their on-disk format.
On-disk formats are typically optimized for minimal size, and in any case
they can't contain pointers, so they are often not well-suited for
computation. Now a datatype can invent an "expanded" in-memory format
that is better suited for its operations, and then pass that around among
the C functions that operate on the datatype. There are also provisions
(rudimentary as yet) to allow an expanded object to be modified in-place
under suitable conditions, so that operations like assignment to an element
of an array need not involve copying the entire array.
The initial application for this feature is arrays, but it is not hard
to foresee using it for other container types like JSON, XML and hstore.
I have hopes that it will be useful to PostGIS as well.
In this initial implementation, a few heuristics have been hard-wired
into plpgsql to improve performance for arrays that are stored in
plpgsql variables. We would like to generalize those hacks so that
other datatypes can obtain similar improvements, but figuring out some
appropriate APIs is left as a task for future work. (The heuristics
themselves are probably not optimal yet, either, as they sometimes
force expansion of arrays that would be better left alone.)
Preliminary performance testing shows impressive speed gains for plpgsql
functions that do element-by-element access or update of large arrays.
There are other cases that get a little slower, as a result of added array
format conversions; but we can hope to improve anything that's annoyingly
bad. In any case most applications should see a net win.
Tom Lane, reviewed by Andres Freund
This reduces unnecessary exposure of other headers through htup.h, which
is very widely included by many files.
I have chosen to move the function prototypes to the new file as well,
because that means htup.h no longer needs to include tupdesc.h. In
itself this doesn't have much effect in indirect inclusion of tupdesc.h
throughout the tree, because it's also required by execnodes.h; but it's
something to explore in the future, and it seemed best to do the htup.h
change now while I'm busy with it.
Alexander Korotkov
Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut
Amit Kapila
Tom Lane
Andres Freund
Michael Paquier
Alvaro Herrera
Peter Eisentraut