An oversight introduced by the incremental-sort patches caused
"could not find pathkey item to sort" errors in some situations
where a sort key involves an aggregate or window function.
The basic problem here is that find_em_expr_usable_for_sorting_rel
isn't properly modeling what prepare_sort_from_pathkeys will do
later. Rather than hoping we can keep those functions in sync,
let's refactor so that they actually share the code for
identifying a suitable sort expression.
With this refactoring, tlist.c's tlist_member_ignore_relabel
is unused. I removed it in HEAD but left it in place in v13,
in case any extensions are using it.
Per report from Luc Vlaming. Back-patch to v13 where the
problem arose.
James Coleman and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/91f3ec99-85a4-fa55-ea74-33f85a5c651f@swarm64.com
Previously, pull_varnos() took the relids of a PlaceHolderVar as being
equal to the relids in its contents, but that fails to account for the
possibility that we have to postpone evaluation of the PHV due to outer
joins. This could result in a malformed plan. The known cases end up
triggering the "failed to assign all NestLoopParams to plan nodes"
sanity check in createplan.c, but other symptoms may be possible.
The right value to use is the join level we actually intend to evaluate
the PHV at. We can get that from the ph_eval_at field of the associated
PlaceHolderInfo. However, there are some places that call pull_varnos()
before the PlaceHolderInfos have been created; in that case, fall back
to the conservative assumption that the PHV will be evaluated at its
syntactic level. (In principle this might result in missing some legal
optimization, but I'm not aware of any cases where it's an issue in
practice.) Things are also a bit ticklish for calls occurring during
deconstruct_jointree(), but AFAICS the ph_eval_at fields should have
reached their final values by the time we need them.
The main problem in making this work is that pull_varnos() has no
way to get at the PlaceHolderInfos. We can fix that easily, if a
bit tediously, in HEAD by passing it the planner "root" pointer.
In the back branches that'd cause an unacceptable API/ABI break for
extensions, so leave the existing entry points alone and add new ones
with the additional parameter. (If an old entry point is called and
encounters a PHV, it'll fall back to using the syntactic level,
again possibly missing some valid optimization.)
Back-patch to v12. The computation is surely also wrong before that,
but it appears that we cannot reach a bad plan thanks to join order
restrictions imposed on the subquery that the PlaceHolderVar came from.
The error only became reachable when commit 4be058fe9 allowed trivial
subqueries to be collapsed out completely, eliminating their join order
restrictions.
Per report from Stephan Springl.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/171041.1610849523@sss.pgh.pa.us
Commit ebb7ae839d ensured we ignore pathkeys with volatile expressions
when considering adding a sort below a Gather Merge. Turns out we need
to care about parallel safety of the pathkeys too, otherwise we might
try sorting e.g. on results of a correlated subquery (as demonstrated
by a report from Luis Roberto).
Initial investigation by Tom Lane, patch by James Coleman. Backpatch
to 13, where the code was instroduced (as part of Incremental Sort).
Reported-by: Luis Roberto
Author: James Coleman
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra
Backpatch-through: 13
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/622580997.37108180.1604080457319.JavaMail.zimbra%40siscobra.com.br
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAaqYe8cK3g5CfLC4w7bs=hC0mSksZC=H5M8LSchj5e5OxpTAg@mail.gmail.com
When considering Incremental Sort below a Gather Merge, we need to be
a bit more careful when matching pathkeys to EC members. It's not enough
to find a member whose Vars are all in the current relation's target;
volatile expressions in particular need to be contained in the target,
otherwise it's too early to use the pathkey.
Reported-by: Jaime Casanova
Author: James Coleman
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra
Backpatch-through: 13, where the incremental sort code was added
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJGNTeNaxpXgBVcRhJX%2B2vSbq%2BF2kJqGBcvompmpvXb7pq%2BoFA%40mail.gmail.com
get_foreign_key_join_selectivity() looks for join clauses that equate
the two sides of the FK constraint. However, if we have a query like
"WHERE fktab.a = pktab.a and fktab.a = 1", it won't find any such join
clause, because equivclass.c replaces the given clauses with "fktab.a
= 1 and pktab.a = 1", which can be enforced at the scan level, leaving
nothing to be done for column "a" at the join level.
We can fix that expectation without much trouble, but then a new problem
arises: applying the foreign-key-based selectivity rule produces a
rowcount underestimate, because we're effectively double-counting the
selectivity of the "fktab.a = 1" clause. So we have to cancel that
selectivity out of the estimate.
To fix, refactor process_implied_equality() so that it can pass back the
new RestrictInfo to its callers in equivclass.c, allowing the generated
"fktab.a = 1" clause to be saved in the EquivalenceClass's ec_derives
list. Then it's not much trouble to dig out the relevant RestrictInfo
when we need to adjust an FK selectivity estimate. (While at it, we
can also remove the expensive use of initialize_mergeclause_eclasses()
to set up the new RestrictInfo's left_ec and right_ec pointers.
The equivclass.c code can set those basically for free.)
This seems like clearly a bug fix, but I'm hesitant to back-patch it,
first because there's some API/ABI risk for extensions and second because
we're usually loath to destabilize plan choices in stable branches.
Per report from Sigrid Ehrenreich.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1019549.1603770457@sss.pgh.pa.us
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/AM6PR02MB5287A0ADD936C1FA80973E72AB190@AM6PR02MB5287.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com
Commit d2d8a229bc introduced Incremental Sort, but it was considered
only in create_ordered_paths() as an alternative to regular Sort. There
are many other places that require sorted input and might benefit from
considering Incremental Sort too.
This patch modifies a number of those places, but not all. The concern
is that just adding Incremental Sort to any place that already adds
Sort may increase the number of paths considered, negatively affecting
planning time, without any benefit. So we've taken a more conservative
approach, based on analysis of which places do affect a set of queries
that did seem practical. This means some less common queries may not
benefit from Incremental Sort yet.
Author: Tomas Vondra
Reviewed-by: James Coleman
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPpHfds1waRZ=NOmueYq0sx1ZSCnt+5QJvizT8ndT2=etZEeAQ@mail.gmail.com
Incremental Sort is an optimized variant of multikey sort for cases when
the input is already sorted by a prefix of the requested sort keys. For
example when the relation is already sorted by (key1, key2) and we need
to sort it by (key1, key2, key3) we can simply split the input rows into
groups having equal values in (key1, key2), and only sort/compare the
remaining column key3.
This has a number of benefits:
- Reduced memory consumption, because only a single group (determined by
values in the sorted prefix) needs to be kept in memory. This may also
eliminate the need to spill to disk.
- Lower startup cost, because Incremental Sort produce results after each
prefix group, which is beneficial for plans where startup cost matters
(like for example queries with LIMIT clause).
We consider both Sort and Incremental Sort, and decide based on costing.
The implemented algorithm operates in two different modes:
- Fetching a minimum number of tuples without check of equality on the
prefix keys, and sorting on all columns when safe.
- Fetching all tuples for a single prefix group and then sorting by
comparing only the remaining (non-prefix) keys.
We always start in the first mode, and employ a heuristic to switch into
the second mode if we believe it's beneficial - the goal is to minimize
the number of unnecessary comparions while keeping memory consumption
below work_mem.
This is a very old patch series. The idea was originally proposed by
Alexander Korotkov back in 2013, and then revived in 2017. In 2018 the
patch was taken over by James Coleman, who wrote and rewrote most of the
current code.
There were many reviewers/contributors since 2013 - I've done my best to
pick the most active ones, and listed them in this commit message.
Author: James Coleman, Alexander Korotkov
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra, Andreas Karlsson, Marti Raudsepp, Peter Geoghegan, Robert Haas, Thomas Munro, Antonin Houska, Andres Freund, Alexander Kuzmenkov
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPpHfdscOX5an71nHd8WSUH6GNOCf=V7wgDaTXdDd9=goN-gfA@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPpHfds1waRZ=NOmueYq0sx1ZSCnt+5QJvizT8ndT2=etZEeAQ@mail.gmail.com
Move have_partkey_equi_join and match_expr_to_partition_keys to
relnode.c, since they're used only there. Refactor
build_joinrel_partition_info to split out the code that fills the
joinrel's partition key lists; this doesn't have any non-cosmetic
impact, but it seems like a useful separation of concerns.
Improve assorted nearby comments.
Amit Langote, with a little further editorialization by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqG2WVUGmLJqtR0tPFhniO=H=9qQ+Z3L_ZC+Y3-EVQHFGg@mail.gmail.com
Commit d25ea0127 got rid of what I thought were entirely unnecessary
derived child expressions in EquivalenceClasses for EC members that
mention multiple baserels. But it turns out that some of the child
expressions that code created are necessary for partitionwise joins,
else we fail to find matching pathkeys for Sort nodes. (This happens
only for certain shapes of the resulting plan; it may be that
partitionwise aggregation is also necessary to show the failure,
though I'm not sure of that.)
Reverting that commit entirely would be quite painful performance-wise
for large partition sets. So instead, add code that explicitly
generates child expressions that match only partitionwise child join
rels we have actually generated.
Per report from Justin Pryzby. (Amit Langote noticed the problem
earlier, though it's not clear if he recognized then that it could
result in a planner error, not merely failure to exploit partitionwise
join, in the code as-committed.) Back-patch to v12 where commit
d25ea0127 came in.
Amit Langote, with lots of kibitzing from me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqG2WVUGmLJqtR0tPFhniO=H=9qQ+Z3L_ZC+Y3-EVQHFGg@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20191011143703.GN10470@telsasoft.com
If we need ordered output from a scan of a partitioned table, but
the ordering matches the partition ordering, then we don't need to
use a MergeAppend to combine the pre-ordered per-partition scan
results: a plain Append will produce the same results. This
both saves useless comparison work inside the MergeAppend proper,
and allows us to start returning tuples after istarting up just
the first child node not all of them.
However, all is not peaches and cream, because if some of the
child nodes have high startup costs then there will be big
discontinuities in the tuples-returned-versus-elapsed-time curve.
The planner's cost model cannot handle that (yet, anyway).
If we model the Append's startup cost as being just the first
child's startup cost, we may drastically underestimate the cost
of fetching slightly more tuples than are available from the first
child. Since we've had bad experiences with over-optimistic choices
of "fast start" plans for ORDER BY LIMIT queries, that seems scary.
As a klugy workaround, set the startup cost estimate for an ordered
Append to be the sum of its children's startup costs (as MergeAppend
would). This doesn't really describe reality, but it's less likely
to cause a bad plan choice than an underestimated startup cost would.
In practice, the cases where we really care about this optimization
will have child plans that are IndexScans with zero startup cost,
so that the overly conservative estimate is still just zero.
David Rowley, reviewed by Julien Rouhaud and Antonin Houska
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f-hAqhPLRk_RaSFTgYxd=Tz5hA7kQ2h4-DhJufQk8TGuw@mail.gmail.com
When we introduced separate ProjectSetPath nodes for application of
set-returning functions in v10, we inadvertently broke some cases where
we're supposed to recognize that the result of a subquery is known to be
empty (contain zero rows). That's because IS_DUMMY_REL was just looking
for a childless AppendPath without allowing for a ProjectSetPath being
possibly stuck on top. In itself, this didn't do anything much worse
than produce slightly worse plans for some corner cases.
Then in v11, commit 11cf92f6e rearranged things to allow the scan/join
targetlist to be applied directly to partial paths before they get
gathered. But it inserted a short-circuit path for dummy relations
that was a little too short: it failed to insert a ProjectSetPath node
at all for a targetlist containing set-returning functions, resulting in
bogus "set-valued function called in context that cannot accept a set"
errors, as reported in bug #15669 from Madelaine Thibaut.
The best way to fix this mess seems to be to reimplement IS_DUMMY_REL
so that it drills down through any ProjectSetPath nodes that might be
there (and it seems like we'd better allow for ProjectionPath as well).
While we're at it, make it look at rel->pathlist not cheapest_total_path,
so that it gives the right answer independently of whether set_cheapest
has been done lately. That dependency looks pretty shaky in the context
of code like apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths, and even if it's not broken
today it'd certainly bite us at some point. (Nastily, unsafe use of the
old coding would almost always work; the hazard comes down to possibly
looking through a dangling pointer, and only once in a blue moon would
you find something there that resulted in the wrong answer.)
It now looks like it was a mistake for IS_DUMMY_REL to be a macro: if
there are any extensions using it, they'll continue to use the old
inadequate logic until they're recompiled, after which they'll fail
to load into server versions predating this fix. Hopefully there are
few such extensions.
Having fixed IS_DUMMY_REL, the special path for dummy rels in
apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths is unnecessary as well as being wrong,
so we can just drop it.
Also change a few places that were testing for partitioned-ness of a
planner relation but not using IS_PARTITIONED_REL for the purpose; that
seems unsafe as well as inconsistent, plus it required an ugly hack in
apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths.
In passing, save a few cycles in apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths by
skipping processing of pre-existing paths for partitioned rels,
and do some cosmetic cleanup and comment adjustment in that function.
I renamed IS_DUMMY_PATH to IS_DUMMY_APPEND with the intention of breaking
any code that might be using it, since in almost every case that would
be wrong; IS_DUMMY_REL is what to be using instead.
In HEAD, also make set_dummy_rel_pathlist static (since it's no longer
used from outside allpaths.c), and delete is_dummy_plan, since it's no
longer used anywhere.
Back-patch as appropriate into v11 and v10.
Tom Lane and Julien Rouhaud
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15669-02fb3296cca26203@postgresql.org
In place of three separate but interrelated lists (indexclauses,
indexquals, and indexqualcols), an IndexPath now has one list
"indexclauses" of IndexClause nodes. This holds basically the same
information as before, but in a more useful format: in particular, there
is now a clear connection between an indexclause (an original restriction
clause from WHERE or JOIN/ON) and the indexquals (directly usable index
conditions) derived from it.
We also change the ground rules a bit by mandating that clause commutation,
if needed, be done up-front so that what is stored in the indexquals list
is always directly usable as an index condition. This gets rid of repeated
re-determination of which side of the clause is the indexkey during costing
and plan generation, as well as repeated lookups of the commutator
operator. To minimize the added up-front cost, the typical case of
commuting a plain OpExpr is handled by a new special-purpose function
commute_restrictinfo(). For RowCompareExprs, generating the new clause
properly commuted to begin with is not really any more complex than before,
it's just different --- and we can save doing that work twice, as the
pretty-klugy original implementation did.
Tracking the connection between original and derived clauses lets us
also track explicitly whether the derived clauses are an exact or lossy
translation of the original. This provides a cheap solution to getting
rid of unnecessary rechecks of boolean index clauses, which previously
seemed like it'd be more expensive than it was worth.
Another pleasant (IMO) side-effect is that EXPLAIN now always shows
index clauses with the indexkey on the left; this seems less confusing.
This commit leaves expand_indexqual_conditions() and some related
functions in a slightly messy state. I didn't bother to change them
any more than minimally necessary to work with the new data structure,
because all that code is going to be refactored out of existence in
a follow-on patch.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/22182.1549124950@sss.pgh.pa.us
The old name of this file was never a very good indication of what it
was for. Now that there's also access/relation.h, we have a potential
confusion hazard as well, so let's rename it to something more apropos.
Per discussion, "pathnodes.h" is reasonable, since a good fraction of
the file is Path node definitions.
While at it, tweak a couple of other headers that were gratuitously
importing relation.h into modules that don't need it.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/7719.1548688728@sss.pgh.pa.us
On further reflection, commit e5d83995e didn't go far enough: pretty much
everywhere in the planner that examines a clause's is_pushed_down flag
ought to be changed to use the more complicated behavior where we also
check the clause's required_relids. Otherwise we could make incorrect
decisions about whether, say, a clause is safe to use as a hash clause.
Some (many?) of these places are safe as-is, either because they are
never reached while considering a parameterized path, or because there
are additional checks that would reject a pushed-down clause anyway.
However, it seems smarter to just code them all the same way rather
than rely on easily-broken reasoning of that sort.
In support of that, invent a new macro RINFO_IS_PUSHED_DOWN that should
be used in place of direct tests on the is_pushed_down flag.
Like the previous patch, back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/f8128b11-c5bf-3539-48cd-234178b2314d@proxel.se
If the partition keys of input relation are part of the GROUP BY
clause, all the rows belonging to a given group come from a single
partition. This allows aggregation/grouping over a partitioned
relation to be broken down * into aggregation/grouping on each
partition. This should be no worse, and often better, than the normal
approach.
If the GROUP BY clause does not contain all the partition keys, we can
still perform partial aggregation for each partition and then finalize
aggregation after appending the partial results. This is less certain
to be a win, but it's still useful.
Jeevan Chalke, Ashutosh Bapat, Robert Haas. The larger patch series
of which this patch is a part was also reviewed and tested by Antonin
Houska, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, David Rowley, Dilip Kumar, Konstantin
Knizhnik, Pascal Legrand, and Rafia Sabih.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAM2+6=V64_xhstVHie0Rz=KPEQnLJMZt_e314P0jaT_oJ9MR8A@mail.gmail.com
Up until now, we've abused grouped_rel->partial_pathlist as a place to
store partial paths that have been partially aggregate, but that's
really not correct, because a partial path for a relation is supposed
to be one which produces the correct results with the addition of only
a Gather or Gather Merge node, and these paths also require a Finalize
Aggregate step. Instead, add a new partially_group_rel which can hold
either partial paths (which need to be gathered and then have
aggregation finalized) or non-partial paths (which only need to have
aggregation finalized). This allows us to reuse generate_gather_paths
for partially_grouped_rel instead of writing new code, so that this
patch actually basically no net new code while making things cleaner,
simplifying things for pending patches for partition-wise aggregate.
Robert Haas and Jeevan Chalke. The larger patch series of which this
patch is a part was also reviewed and tested by Antonin Houska,
Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, David Rowley, Dilip Kumar, Konstantin Knizhnik,
Pascal Legrand, Rafia Sabih, and me.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmobrzFYS3+U8a_BCy3-hOvh5UyJbC18rEcYehxhpw5=ETA@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZyQEjdBNuoG9-wC5GQ5GrO4544Myo13dVptvx+uLg9uQ@mail.gmail.com
Given overlapping or partially redundant join clauses, for example
t1 JOIN t2 ON t1.a = t2.x AND t1.b = t2.x
the planner's EquivalenceClass machinery will ordinarily refactor the
clauses as "t1.a = t1.b AND t1.a = t2.x", so that join processing doesn't
see multiple references to the same EquivalenceClass in a list of join
equality clauses. However, if the join is outer, it's incorrect to derive
a restriction clause on the outer side from the join conditions, so the
clause refactoring does not happen and we end up with overlapping join
conditions. The code that attempted to deal with such cases had several
subtle bugs, which could result in "left and right pathkeys do not match in
mergejoin" or "outer pathkeys do not match mergeclauses" planner errors,
if the selected join plan type was a mergejoin. (It does not appear that
any actually incorrect plan could have been emitted.)
The core of the problem really was failure to recognize that the outer and
inner relations' pathkeys have different relationships to the mergeclause
list. A join's mergeclause list is constructed by reference to the outer
pathkeys, so it will always be ordered the same as the outer pathkeys, but
this cannot be presumed true for the inner pathkeys. If the inner sides of
the mergeclauses contain multiple references to the same EquivalenceClass
({t2.x} in the above example) then a simplistic rendering of the required
inner sort order is like "ORDER BY t2.x, t2.x", but the pathkey machinery
recognizes that the second sort column is redundant and throws it away.
The mergejoin planning code failed to account for that behavior properly.
One error was to try to generate cut-down versions of the mergeclause list
from cut-down versions of the inner pathkeys in the same way as the initial
construction of the mergeclause list from the outer pathkeys was done; this
could lead to choosing a mergeclause list that fails to match the outer
pathkeys. The other problem was that the pathkey cross-checking code in
create_mergejoin_plan treated the inner and outer pathkey lists
identically, whereas actually the expectations for them must be different.
That led to false "pathkeys do not match" failures in some cases, and in
principle could have led to failure to detect bogus plans in other cases,
though there is no indication that such bogus plans could be generated.
Reported by Alexander Kuzmenkov, who also reviewed this patch. This has
been broken for years (back to around 8.3 according to my testing), so
back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/5dad9160-4632-0e47-e120-8e2082000c01@postgrespro.ru
To make this work, tuplesort.c and logtape.c must also support
parallelism, so this patch adds that infrastructure and then applies
it to the particular case of parallel btree index builds. Testing
to date shows that this can often be 2-3x faster than a serial
index build.
The model for deciding how many workers to use is fairly primitive
at present, but it's better than not having the feature. We can
refine it as we get more experience.
Peter Geoghegan with some help from Rushabh Lathia. While Heikki
Linnakangas is not an author of this patch, he wrote other patches
without which this feature would not have been possible, and
therefore the release notes should possibly credit him as an author
of this feature. Reviewed by Claudio Freire, Heikki Linnakangas,
Thomas Munro, Tels, Amit Kapila, me.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAM3SWZQKM=Pzc=CAHzRixKjp2eO5Q0Jg1SoFQqeXFQ647JiwqQ@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAH2-Wz=AxWqDoVvGU7dq856S4r6sJAj6DBn7VMtigkB33N5eyg@mail.gmail.com
If the operator is a strict btree equality operator, and X isn't volatile,
then the clause must yield true for any non-null value of X, or null if X
is null. At top level of a WHERE clause, we can ignore the distinction
between false and null results, so it's valid to simplify the clause to
"X IS NOT NULL". This is a useful improvement mainly because we'll get
a far better selectivity estimate in most cases.
Because such cases seldom arise in well-written queries, it is unappetizing
to expend a lot of planner cycles looking for them ... but it turns out
that there's a place we can shoehorn this in practically for free, because
equivclass.c already has to detect and reject candidate equivalences of the
form X = X. That doesn't catch every place that it would be valid to
simplify to X IS NOT NULL, but it catches the typical case. Working harder
doesn't seem justified.
Patch by me, reviewed by Petr Jelinek
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMjNa7cC4X9YR-vAJS-jSYCajhRDvJQnN7m2sLH1wLh-_Z2bsw@mail.gmail.com
Instead of joining two partitioned tables in their entirety we can, if
it is an equi-join on the partition keys, join the matching partitions
individually. This involves teaching the planner about "other join"
rels, which are related to regular join rels in the same way that
other member rels are related to baserels. This can use significantly
more CPU time and memory than regular join planning, because there may
now be a set of "other" rels not only for every base relation but also
for every join relation. In most practical cases, this probably
shouldn't be a problem, because (1) it's probably unusual to join many
tables each with many partitions using the partition keys for all
joins and (2) if you do that scenario then you probably have a big
enough machine to handle the increased memory cost of planning and (3)
the resulting plan is highly likely to be better, so what you spend in
planning you'll make up on the execution side. All the same, for now,
turn this feature off by default.
Currently, we can only perform joins between two tables whose
partitioning schemes are absolutely identical. It would be nice to
cope with other scenarios, such as extra partitions on one side or the
other with no match on the other side, but that will have to wait for
a future patch.
Ashutosh Bapat, reviewed and tested by Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Amit
Langote, Rafia Sabih, Thomas Munro, Dilip Kumar, Antonin Houska, Amit
Khandekar, and by me. A few final adjustments by me.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAFjFpRfQ8GrQvzp3jA2wnLqrHmaXna-urjm_UY9BqXj=EaDTSA@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAFjFpRcitjfrULr5jfuKWRPsGUX0LQ0k8-yG0Qw2+1LBGNpMdw@mail.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
The new indent version includes numerous fixes thanks to Piotr Stefaniak.
The main changes visible in this commit are:
* Nicer formatting of function-pointer declarations.
* No longer unexpectedly removes spaces in expressions using casts,
sizeof, or offsetof.
* No longer wants to add a space in "struct structname *varname", as
well as some similar cases for const- or volatile-qualified pointers.
* Declarations using PG_USED_FOR_ASSERTS_ONLY are formatted more nicely.
* Fixes bug where comments following declarations were sometimes placed
with no space separating them from the code.
* Fixes some odd decisions for comments following case labels.
* Fixes some cases where comments following code were indented to less
than the expected column 33.
On the less good side, it now tends to put more whitespace around typedef
names that are not listed in typedefs.list. This might encourage us to
put more effort into typedef name collection; it's not really a bug in
indent itself.
There are more changes coming after this round, having to do with comment
indentation and alignment of lines appearing within parentheses. I wanted
to limit the size of the diffs to something that could be reviewed without
one's eyes completely glazing over, so it seemed better to split up the
changes as much as practical.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1dAmxK-0006EE-1r@gemulon.postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/30527.1495162840@sss.pgh.pa.us
Commit 51ee6f3160 accidentally changed
the behavior around inheritance hierarchies; before, we always
considered parallel paths even for very small inheritance children,
because otherwise an inheritance hierarchy with even one small child
wouldn't be eligible for parallelism. That exception was inadverently
removed; put it back.
In passing, also adjust the degree-of-parallelism comptuation for
index-only scans not to consider the number of heap pages fetched.
Otherwise, we'll avoid parallel index-only scans on tables that are
mostly all-visible, which isn't especially logical.
Robert Haas and Amit Kapila, per a report from Ashutosh Sharma.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAE9k0PmgSoOHRd60SHu09aRVTHRSs8s6pmyhJKWHxWw9C_x+XA@mail.gmail.com
The index is scanned by a single process, but then all cooperating
processes can iterate jointly over the resulting set of heap blocks.
In the future, we might also want to support using a parallel bitmap
index scan to set up for a parallel bitmap heap scan, but that's a
job for another day.
Dilip Kumar, with some corrections and cosmetic changes by me. The
larger patch set of which this is a part has been reviewed and tested
by (at least) Andres Freund, Amit Khandekar, Tushar Ahuja, Rafia
Sabih, Haribabu Kommi, Thomas Munro, and me.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAFiTN-uc4=0WxRGfCzs-xfkMYcSEWUC-Fon6thkJGjkh9i=13A@mail.gmail.com
Extract the logic used by hash_inner_and_outer into a separate
function, get_cheapest_parallel_safe_total_inner, so that it can
also be used to plan parallel merge joins.
Also, add a require_parallel_safe argument to the existing function
get_cheapest_path_for_pathkeys, because parallel merge join needs
to find the cheapest path for a given set of pathkeys that is
parallel-safe, not just the cheapest one overall.
Patch by me, reviewed by Dilip Kumar.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoYOv+dFK0MWW6366dFj_xTnohQfoBDrHyB7d1oZhrgPjA@mail.gmail.com
In combination with 569174f1be, which
taught the btree AM how to perform parallel index scans, this allows
parallel index scan plans on btree indexes. This infrastructure
should be general enough to support parallel index scans for other
index AMs as well, if someone updates them to support parallel
scans.
Amit Kapila, reviewed and tested by Anastasia Lubennikova, Tushar
Ahuja, and Haribabu Kommi, and me.
When min_parallel_relation_size was added, the only supported type
of parallel scan was a parallel sequential scan, but there are
pending patches for parallel index scan, parallel index-only scan,
and parallel bitmap heap scan. Those patches introduce two new
types of complications: first, what's relevant is not really the
total size of the relation but the portion of it that we will scan;
and second, index pages and heap pages shouldn't necessarily be
treated in exactly the same way. Typically, the number of index
pages will be quite small, but that doesn't necessarily mean that
a parallel index scan can't pay off.
Therefore, we introduce min_parallel_table_scan_size, which works
out a degree of parallelism for scans based on the number of table
pages that will be scanned (and which is therefore equivalent to
min_parallel_relation_size for parallel sequential scans) and also
min_parallel_index_scan_size which can be used to work out a degree
of parallelism based on the number of index pages that will be
scanned.
Amit Kapila and Robert Haas
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAA4eK1KowGSYYVpd2qPpaPPA5R90r++QwDFbrRECTE9H_HvpOg@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAA4eK1+TnM4pXQbvn7OXqam+k_HZqb0ROZUMxOiL6DWJYCyYow@mail.gmail.com
Normally, if we have a WHERE clause like "indexcol = constant",
the planner will figure out that that index column can be ignored
when determining whether the index has a desired sort ordering.
But this failed to work for boolean index columns, because a
condition like "boolcol = true" is canonicalized to just "boolcol"
which does not give rise to an EquivalenceClass. Add a check to
allow the same type of deduction to be made in this case too.
Per a complaint from Dima Pavlov. Arguably this is a bug, but given the
limited impact and the small number of complaints so far, I won't risk
destabilizing plans in stable branches by back-patching.
Patch by me, reviewed by Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1788.1481605684@sss.pgh.pa.us
This patch provides a new implementation of the logic added by commit
137805f89 and later removed by 77ba61080. It differs from the original
primarily in expending much less effort per joinrel in large queries,
which it accomplishes by doing most of the matching work once per query not
once per joinrel. Hopefully, it's also less buggy and better commented.
The never-documented enable_fkey_estimates GUC remains gone.
There remains work to be done to make the selectivity estimates account
for nulls in FK referencing columns; but that was true of the original
patch as well. We may be able to address this point later in beta.
In the meantime, any error should be in the direction of overestimating
rather than underestimating joinrel sizes, which seems like the direction
we want to err in.
Tomas Vondra and Tom Lane
Discussion: <31041.1465069446@sss.pgh.pa.us>
The main point of doing this is to allow the cutoff to be set very small,
even zero, to allow parallel-query behavior to be tested on relatively
small tables such as we typically use in the regression tests. But it
might be of use to users too. The number-of-workers scaling behavior in
create_plain_partial_paths() is pretty ad-hoc and subject to change, so
we won't expose anything about that, but the notion of not considering
parallel query at all for tables below size X seems reasonably stable.
Amit Kapila, per a suggestion from me
Discussion: <17170.1465830165@sss.pgh.pa.us>
This commit reverts 137805f89 as well as the associated commits 015e88942,
5306df283, and 68d704edb. We found multiple bugs in this feature, and
there was concern about possible planner slowdown (though to be fair,
exhibiting a very large slowdown proved difficult). The way forward
requires a considerable rewrite, which may or may not be possible to
accomplish in time for beta2. In my judgment reviewing the rewrite will
be easier to accomplish starting from a clean slate, so let's temporarily
revert what's there now. This also leaves us in a safe state if it turns
out to be necessary to postpone the rewrite to the next development cycle.
Discussion: <20160429102531.GA13701@huehner.biz>
Given a three-or-more-way equivalence class, such as X.Y = Y.Y = Z.Z,
it was possible for the planner to omit one of the quals needed to
enforce that all members of the equivalence class are actually equal.
This only happened in the case of a parameterized join node for two
of the relations, that is a plan tree like
Nested Loop
-> Scan X
-> Nested Loop
-> Scan Y
-> Scan Z
Filter: Z.Z = X.X
The eclass machinery normally expects to apply X.X = Y.Y when those
two relations are joined, but in this shape of plan tree they aren't
joined until the top node --- and, if the lower nested loop is marked
as parameterized by X, the top node will assume that the relevant eclass
condition(s) got pushed down into the lower node. On the other hand,
the scan of Z assumes that it's only responsible for constraining Z.Z
to match any one of the other eclass members. So one or another of
the required quals sometimes fell between the cracks, depending on
whether consideration of the eclass in get_joinrel_parampathinfo()
for the lower nested loop chanced to generate X.X = Y.Y or X.X = Z.Z
as the appropriate constraint there. If it generated the latter,
it'd erroneously suppose that the Z scan would take care of matters.
To fix, force X.X = Y.Y to be generated and applied at that join node
when this case occurs.
This is *extremely* hard to hit in practice, because various planner
behaviors conspire to mask the problem; starting with the fact that the
planner doesn't really like to generate a parameterized plan of the
above shape. (It might have been impossible to hit it before we
tweaked things to allow this plan shape for star-schema cases.) Many
thanks to Alexander Kirkouski for submitting a reproducible test case.
The bug can be demonstrated in all branches back to 9.2 where parameterized
paths were introduced, so back-patch that far.
In cases where joins use multiple columns we currently assess each join
separately causing gross mis-estimates for join cardinality.
This patch adds use of FK information for the first time into the
planner. When FKs are present and we have multi-column join information,
plan estimates will be drastically improved. Cases with multiple FKs
are handled, though partial matches are ignored currently.
Net effect is substantial performance improvements for joins in many
common cases. Additional planning time is isolated to cases that are
currently performing poorly, measured at 0.08 - 0.15 ms.
Please watch for planner performance regressions; circumstances seem
unlikely but the law of unintended consequences may apply somewhen.
Additional complex tests welcome to prove this before release.
Tests can be performed using SET enable_fkey_estimates = on | off
using scripts provided during Hackers discussions, message id:
552335D9.3090707@2ndquadrant.com
Authors: Tomas Vondra and David Rowley
Reviewed and tested by Simon Riggs, adding comments only
Previously, the planner would reject an index-only scan if any restriction
clause for its table used a column not available from the index, even
if that restriction clause would later be dropped from the plan entirely
because it's implied by the index's predicate. This is a fairly common
situation for partial indexes because predicates using columns not included
in the index are often the most useful kind of predicate, and we have to
duplicate (or at least imply) the predicate in the WHERE clause in order
to get the index to be considered at all. So index-only scans were
essentially unavailable with such partial indexes.
To fix, we have to do detection of implied-by-predicate clauses much
earlier in the planner. This patch puts it in check_index_predicates
(nee check_partial_indexes), meaning it gets done for every partial index,
whereas we previously only considered this issue at createplan time,
so that the work was only done for an index actually selected for use.
That could result in a noticeable planning slowdown for queries against
tables with many partial indexes. However, testing suggested that there
isn't really a significant cost, especially not with reasonable numbers
of partial indexes. We do get a small additional benefit, which is that
cost_index is more accurate since it correctly discounts the evaluation
cost of clauses that will be removed. We can also avoid considering such
clauses as potential indexquals, which saves useless matching cycles in
the case where the predicate columns aren't in the index, and prevents
generating bogus plans that double-count the clause's selectivity when
the columns are in the index.
Tomas Vondra and Kyotaro Horiguchi, reviewed by Kevin Grittner and
Konstantin Knizhnik, and whacked around a little by me
I've been saying we needed to do this for more than five years, and here it
finally is. This patch removes the ever-growing tangle of spaghetti logic
that grouping_planner() used to use to try to identify the best plan for
post-scan/join query steps. Now, there is (nearly) independent
consideration of each execution step, and entirely separate construction of
Paths to represent each of the possible ways to do that step. We choose
the best Path or set of Paths using the same add_path() logic that's been
used inside query_planner() for years.
In addition, this patch removes the old restriction that subquery_planner()
could return only a single Plan. It now returns a RelOptInfo containing a
set of Paths, just as query_planner() does, and the parent query level can
use each of those Paths as the basis of a SubqueryScanPath at its level.
This allows finding some optimizations that we missed before, wherein a
subquery was capable of returning presorted data and thereby avoiding a
sort in the parent level, making the overall cost cheaper even though
delivering sorted output was not the cheapest plan for the subquery in
isolation. (A couple of regression test outputs change in consequence of
that. However, there is very little change in visible planner behavior
overall, because the point of this patch is not to get immediate planning
benefits but to create the infrastructure for future improvements.)
There is a great deal left to do here. This patch unblocks a lot of
planner work that was basically impractical in the old code structure,
such as allowing FDWs to implement remote aggregation, or rewriting
plan_set_operations() to allow consideration of multiple implementation
orders for set operations. (The latter will likely require a full
rewrite of plan_set_operations(); what I've done here is only to fix it
to return Paths not Plans.) I have also left unfinished some localized
refactoring in createplan.c and planner.c, because it was not necessary
to get this patch to a working state.
Thanks to Robert Haas, David Rowley, and Amit Kapila for review.
The core innovation of this patch is the introduction of the concept
of a partial path; that is, a path which if executed in parallel will
generate a subset of the output rows in each process. Gathering a
partial path produces an ordinary (complete) path. This allows us to
generate paths for parallel joins by joining a partial path for one
side (which at the baserel level is currently always a Partial Seq
Scan) to an ordinary path on the other side. This is subject to
various restrictions at present, especially that this strategy seems
unlikely to be sensible for merge joins, so only nested loops and
hash joins paths are generated.
This also allows an Append node to be pushed below a Gather node in
the case of a partitioned table.
Testing revealed that early versions of this patch made poor decisions
in some cases, which turned out to be caused by the fact that the
original cost model for Parallel Seq Scan wasn't very good. So this
patch tries to make some modest improvements in that area.
There is much more to be done in the area of generating good parallel
plans in all cases, but this seems like a useful step forward.
Patch by me, reviewed by Dilip Kumar and Amit Kapila.
When use_remote_estimate is enabled, consider adding ORDER BY to the
query we sending to the remote server so that we can use that ordered
data for a merge join. Commit f18c944b61
arranges to push down the query pathkeys, which seems like the case
mostly likely to be a win, but testing shows this can sometimes win,
too.
For a regular table, we know which indexes are present and therefore
test whether the ordering provided by each such index is useful. Here,
we take the opposite approach: guess what orderings would be useful if
they could be generated cheaply, and then ask the remote side what those
will cost.
Ashutosh Bapat, with very substantial cosmetic revisions by me. Also
reviewed by Rushabh Lathia.
More fuzz testing by Andreas Seltenreich exposed that the planner did not
cope well with chains of lateral references. If relation X references Y
laterally, and Y references Z laterally, then we will have to scan X on the
inside of a nestloop with Z, so for all intents and purposes X is laterally
dependent on Z too. The planner did not understand this and would generate
intermediate joins that could not be used. While that was usually harmless
except for wasting some planning cycles, under the right circumstances it
would lead to "failed to build any N-way joins" or "could not devise a
query plan" planner failures.
To fix that, convert the existing per-relation lateral_relids and
lateral_referencers relid sets into their transitive closures; that is,
they now show all relations on which a rel is directly or indirectly
laterally dependent. This not only fixes the chained-reference problem
but allows some of the relevant tests to be made substantially simpler
and faster, since they can be reduced to simple bitmap manipulations
instead of searches of the LateralJoinInfo list.
Also, when a PlaceHolderVar that is due to be evaluated at a join contains
lateral references, we should treat those references as indirect lateral
dependencies of each of the join's base relations. This prevents us from
trying to join any individual base relations to the lateral reference
source before the join is formed, which again cannot work.
Andreas' testing also exposed another oversight in the "dangerous
PlaceHolderVar" test added in commit 85e5e222b1. Simply rejecting
unsafe join paths in joinpath.c is insufficient, because in some cases
we will end up rejecting *all* possible paths for a particular join, again
leading to "could not devise a query plan" failures. The restriction has
to be known also to join_is_legal and its cohort functions, so that they
will not select a join for which that will happen. I chose to move the
supporting logic into joinrels.c where the latter functions are.
Back-patch to 9.3 where LATERAL support was introduced.
Formerly, this function would always return "true" for an appendrel child
relation, because it would think that the appendrel parent was a potential
join target for the child. In principle that should only lead to some
inefficiency in planning, but fuzz testing by Andreas Seltenreich disclosed
that it could lead to "could not find pathkey item to sort" planner errors
in odd corner cases. Specifically, we would think that all columns of a
child table's multicolumn index were interesting pathkeys, causing us to
generate a MergeAppend path that sorts by all the columns. However, if any
of those columns weren't actually used above the level of the appendrel,
they would not get added to that rel's targetlist, which would result in
being unable to resolve the MergeAppend's sort keys against its targetlist
during createplan.c.
Backpatch to 9.3. In older versions, columns of an appendrel get added
to its targetlist even if they're not mentioned above the scan level,
so that the failure doesn't occur. It might be worth back-patching this
fix to older versions anyway, but I'll refrain for the moment.
Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian
Tomas Vondra
Robert Haas
Peter Eisentraut
Simon Riggs