Commit 6b80394781 introduced integer comparison functions designed
to be as efficient as possible while avoiding overflow. This
commit makes use of these functions in many of the in-tree qsort()
comparators to help ensure transitivity. Many of these comparator
functions should also see a small performance boost.
Author: Mats Kindahl
Reviewed-by: Andres Freund, Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA%2B14426g2Wa9QuUpmakwPxXFWG_1FaY0AsApkvcTBy-YfS6uaw%40mail.gmail.com
list_copy_head() given an empty List would crash from trying to
dereference the List to obtain its length. Since NIL is how we represent
an empty List, we should just be returning another empty List in this
case.
list_copy_head() is new to v16, so let's fix it now before too many people
start coding around the buggy NIL behavior.
Reported-by: Miroslav Bendik
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPoEpV02WhawuWnmnKet6BqU63bEu7oec0pJc=nKMtPsHMzTXQ@mail.gmail.com
There are a few things that we could do a little better within
get_cheapest_group_keys_order():
1. We should be using list_free() rather than pfree() on a List.
2. We should use for_each_from() instead of manually coding a for loop to
skip the first n elements of a List
3. list_truncate(list_copy(...), n) is not a great way to copy the first n
elements of a list. Let's invent list_copy_head() for that. That way we
don't need to copy the entire list just to truncate it directly
afterwards.
4. We can simplify finding the cheapest cost by setting the cheapest cost
variable to DBL_MAX. That allows us to skip special-casing the initial
iteration of the loop.
Author: David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvrGyL3ft8waEkncG9y5HDMu5TFFJB1paoTC8zi9YK97Nw@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 15, where get_cheapest_group_keys_order was added.
Use it for RelationSyncEntry->streamed_txns, which is currently using an
integer list.
The API support is not complete, not because it is hard to write but
because it's unclear that it's worth the code space, there being so
little use of XID lists.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/202205130830.g5ntonhztspb@alvherre.pgsql
Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
As in commits 6301c3ada and e9d9ba2a4, avoid doing repetitive
list_delete_first() operations, since that would be expensive when
there are many files waiting to be unlinked. This is a slightly
larger change than in those cases. We have to keep the list state
valid for calls to AbsorbSyncRequests(), so it's necessary to invent a
"canceled" field instead of immediately deleting PendingUnlinkEntry
entries. Also, because we might not be able to process all the
entries, we need a new list primitive list_delete_first_n().
list_delete_first_n() is almost list_copy_tail(), but it modifies the
input List instead of making a new copy. I found a couple of existing
uses of the latter that could profitably use the new function. (There
might be more, but the other callers look like they probably shouldn't
overwrite the input List.)
As before, back-patch to v13.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CD2F0E7F-9822-45EC-A411-AE56F14DEA9F@amazon.com
With grouping sets, it's possible that some of the grouping sets are
duplicate. This is especially common with CUBE and ROLLUP clauses. For
example GROUP BY CUBE (a,b), CUBE (b,c) is equivalent to
GROUP BY GROUPING SETS (
(a, b, c),
(a, b, c),
(a, b, c),
(a, b),
(a, b),
(a, b),
(a),
(a),
(a),
(c, a),
(c, a),
(c, a),
(c),
(b, c),
(b),
()
)
Some of the grouping sets are calculated multiple times, which is mostly
unnecessary. This commit implements a new GROUP BY DISTINCT feature, as
defined in the SQL standard, which eliminates the duplicate sets.
Author: Vik Fearing
Reviewed-by: Erik Rijkers, Georgios Kokolatos, Tomas Vondra
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/bf3805a8-d7d1-ae61-fece-761b7ff41ecc@postgresfriends.org
Extends the FDW API to allow batching inserts into foreign tables. That
is usually much more efficient than inserting individual rows, due to
high latency for each round-trip to the foreign server.
It was possible to implement something similar in the regular FDW API,
but it was inconvenient and there were issues with reporting the number
of actually inserted rows etc. This extends the FDW API with two new
functions:
* GetForeignModifyBatchSize - allows the FDW picking optimal batch size
* ExecForeignBatchInsert - inserts a batch of rows at once
Currently, only INSERT queries support batching. Support for DELETE and
UPDATE may be added in the future.
This also implements batching for postgres_fdw. The batch size may be
specified using "batch_size" option both at the server and table level.
The initial patch version was written by me, but it was rewritten and
improved in many ways by Takayuki Tsunakawa.
Author: Takayuki Tsunakawa
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra, Amit Langote
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200628151002.7x5laxwpgvkyiu3q@development
2nd pass of modifying various places which obtain the next power
of 2 of a number and make them use the new functions added in
f0705bb62.
In passing, also modify num_combinations(). This can be implemented
using simple bitshifting rather than looping.
Reviewed-by: John Naylor
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200114173553.GE32763%40fetter.org
Commit 1cff1b95a included some code that supposed it could repalloc()
a memory chunk to a smaller size without risk of the chunk moving.
That was not a great idea, because it depended on undocumented behavior
of AllocSetRealloc, which commit c477f3e44 changed thereby breaking it.
(Not to mention that this code ought to work with other memory context
types, which might not work the same...) So get rid of the repalloc
calls, and instead just wipe the now-unused ListCell array and/or tell
Valgrind it's NOACCESS, as if we'd freed it.
In cases where the initial list allocation had been quite large, this
could represent an annoying waste of space. In principle we could
ameliorate that by allocating the initial cell array separately when
it exceeds some threshold. But that would complicate new_list() which
is hot code, and the returns would materialize only in narrow cases.
On balance I don't think it'd be worth it.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17059.1570208426@sss.pgh.pa.us
In the wake of commit 1cff1b95a, the result of list_concat no longer
shares the ListCells of the second input. Therefore, we can replace
"list_concat(x, list_copy(y))" with just "list_concat(x, y)".
To improve call sites that were list_copy'ing the first argument,
or both arguments, invent "list_concat_copy()" which produces a new
list sharing no ListCells with either input. (This is a bit faster
than "list_concat(list_copy(x), y)" because it makes the result list
the right size to start with.)
In call sites that were not list_copy'ing the second argument, the new
semantics mean that we are usually leaking the second List's storage,
since typically there is no remaining pointer to it. We considered
inventing another list_copy variant that would list_free the second
input, but concluded that for most call sites it isn't worth worrying
about, given the relative compactness of the new List representation.
(Note that in cases where such leakage would happen, the old code
already leaked the second List's header; so we're only discussing
the size of the leak not whether there is one. I did adjust two or
three places that had been troubling to free that header so that
they manually free the whole second List.)
Patch by me; thanks to David Rowley for review.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/11587.1550975080@sss.pgh.pa.us
Formerly, lcons was about the same speed as lappend, but with the new
List implementation, that's not so; with a long List, data movement
imposes an O(N) cost on lcons and list_delete_first, but not lappend.
Hence, invent list_delete_last with semantics parallel to
list_delete_first (but O(1) cost), and change various places to use
lappend and list_delete_last where this can be done without much
violence to the code logic.
There are quite a few places that construct result lists using lcons not
lappend. Some have semantic rationales for that; I added comments about
it to a couple that didn't have them already. In many such places though,
I think the coding is that way only because back in the dark ages lcons
was faster than lappend. Hence, switch to lappend where this can be done
without causing semantic changes.
In ExecInitExprRec(), this results in aggregates and window functions that
are in the same plan node being executed in a different order than before.
Generally, the executions of such functions ought to be independent of
each other, so this shouldn't result in visibly different query results.
But if you push it, as one regression test case does, you can show that
the order is different. The new order seems saner; it's closer to
the order of the functions in the query text. And we never documented
or promised anything about this, anyway.
Also, in gistfinishsplit(), don't bother building a reverse-order list;
it's easy now to iterate backwards through the original list.
It'd be possible to go further towards removing uses of lcons and
list_delete_first, but it'd require more extensive logic changes,
and I'm not convinced it's worth it. Most of the remaining uses
deal with queues that probably never get long enough to be worth
sweating over. (Actually, I doubt that any of the changes in this
patch will have measurable performance effects either. But better
to have good examples than bad ones in the code base.)
Patch by me, thanks to David Rowley and Daniel Gustafsson for review.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/21272.1563318411@sss.pgh.pa.us
It seems worth getting rid of these functions because they require the
caller to retain a ListCell pointer into a List that it's modifying,
which is a dangerous practice with the new List implementation.
(The only other List-modifying function that takes a ListCell pointer
as input is list_delete_cell, which nowadays is preferentially used
via the constrained API foreach_delete_current.)
There was only one remaining caller of these functions after commit
2f5b8eb5a, and that was some fairly ugly GEQO code that can be much
more clearly expressed using a list-index variable and list_insert_nth.
Hence, rewrite that code, and remove the functions.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/26193.1563228600@sss.pgh.pa.us
heap.c and relcache.c contained nearly identical copies of logic
to insert OIDs into an OID list while preserving the list's OID
ordering (and rejecting duplicates, in one case but not the other).
The comments argue that this is faster than qsort for small numbers
of OIDs, which is at best unproven, and seems even less likely to be
true now that lappend_cell_oid has to move data around. In any case
it's ugly and hard-to-follow code, and if we do have a lot of OIDs
to consider, it's O(N^2).
Hence, replace with simply lappend'ing OIDs to a List, then list_sort
the completed List, then remove adjacent duplicates if necessary.
This is demonstrably O(N log N) and it's much simpler for the
callers. It's possible that this would be somewhat inefficient
if there were a very large number of duplicates, but that seems
unlikely in the existing usage.
This adds list_deduplicate_oid and list_oid_cmp infrastructure
to list.c. I didn't bother with equivalent functionality for
integer or pointer Lists, but such could always be added later
if we find a use for it.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/26193.1563228600@sss.pgh.pa.us
In the wake of commit 1cff1b95a, the obvious way to sort a List
is to apply qsort() directly to the array of ListCells. list_qsort
was building an intermediate array of pointers-to-ListCells, which
we no longer need, but getting rid of it forces an API change:
the comparator functions need to do one less level of indirection.
Since we're having to touch the callers anyway, let's do two additional
changes: sort the given list in-place rather than making a copy (as
none of the existing callers have any use for the copying behavior),
and rename list_qsort to list_sort. It was argued that the old name
exposes more about the implementation than it should, which I find
pretty questionable, but a better reason to rename it is to be sure
we get the attention of any external callers about the need to fix
their comparator functions.
While we're at it, change four existing callers of qsort() to use
list_sort instead; previously, they all had local reinventions
of list_qsort, ie build-an-array-from-a-List-and-qsort-it.
(There are some other places where changing to list_sort perhaps
would be worthwhile, but they're less obviously wins.)
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/29361.1563220190@sss.pgh.pa.us
Originally, Postgres Lists were a more or less exact reimplementation of
Lisp lists, which consist of chains of separately-allocated cons cells,
each having a value and a next-cell link. We'd hacked that once before
(commit d0b4399d8) to add a separate List header, but the data was still
in cons cells. That makes some operations -- notably list_nth() -- O(N),
and it's bulky because of the next-cell pointers and per-cell palloc
overhead, and it's very cache-unfriendly if the cons cells end up
scattered around rather than being adjacent.
In this rewrite, we still have List headers, but the data is in a
resizable array of values, with no next-cell links. Now we need at
most two palloc's per List, and often only one, since we can allocate
some values in the same palloc call as the List header. (Of course,
extending an existing List may require repalloc's to enlarge the array.
But this involves just O(log N) allocations not O(N).)
Of course this is not without downsides. The key difficulty is that
addition or deletion of a list entry may now cause other entries to
move, which it did not before.
For example, that breaks foreach() and sister macros, which historically
used a pointer to the current cons-cell as loop state. We can repair
those macros transparently by making their actual loop state be an
integer list index; the exposed "ListCell *" pointer is no longer state
carried across loop iterations, but is just a derived value. (In
practice, modern compilers can optimize things back to having just one
loop state value, at least for simple cases with inline loop bodies.)
In principle, this is a semantics change for cases where the loop body
inserts or deletes list entries ahead of the current loop index; but
I found no such cases in the Postgres code.
The change is not at all transparent for code that doesn't use foreach()
but chases lists "by hand" using lnext(). The largest share of such
code in the backend is in loops that were maintaining "prev" and "next"
variables in addition to the current-cell pointer, in order to delete
list cells efficiently using list_delete_cell(). However, we no longer
need a previous-cell pointer to delete a list cell efficiently. Keeping
a next-cell pointer doesn't work, as explained above, but we can improve
matters by changing such code to use a regular foreach() loop and then
using the new macro foreach_delete_current() to delete the current cell.
(This macro knows how to update the associated foreach loop's state so
that no cells will be missed in the traversal.)
There remains a nontrivial risk of code assuming that a ListCell *
pointer will remain good over an operation that could now move the list
contents. To help catch such errors, list.c can be compiled with a new
define symbol DEBUG_LIST_MEMORY_USAGE that forcibly moves list contents
whenever that could possibly happen. This makes list operations
significantly more expensive so it's not normally turned on (though it
is on by default if USE_VALGRIND is on).
There are two notable API differences from the previous code:
* lnext() now requires the List's header pointer in addition to the
current cell's address.
* list_delete_cell() no longer requires a previous-cell argument.
These changes are somewhat unfortunate, but on the other hand code using
either function needs inspection to see if it is assuming anything
it shouldn't, so it's not all bad.
Programmers should be aware of these significant performance changes:
* list_nth() and related functions are now O(1); so there's no
major access-speed difference between a list and an array.
* Inserting or deleting a list element now takes time proportional to
the distance to the end of the list, due to moving the array elements.
(However, it typically *doesn't* require palloc or pfree, so except in
long lists it's probably still faster than before.) Notably, lcons()
used to be about the same cost as lappend(), but that's no longer true
if the list is long. Code that uses lcons() and list_delete_first()
to maintain a stack might usefully be rewritten to push and pop at the
end of the list rather than the beginning.
* There are now list_insert_nth...() and list_delete_nth...() functions
that add or remove a list cell identified by index. These have the
data-movement penalty explained above, but there's no search penalty.
* list_concat() and variants now copy the second list's data into
storage belonging to the first list, so there is no longer any
sharing of cells between the input lists. The second argument is
now declared "const List *" to reflect that it isn't changed.
This patch just does the minimum needed to get the new implementation
in place and fix bugs exposed by the regression tests. As suggested
by the foregoing, there's a fair amount of followup work remaining to
do.
Also, the ENABLE_LIST_COMPAT macros are finally removed in this
commit. Code using those should have been gone a dozen years ago.
Patch by me; thanks to David Rowley, Jesper Pedersen, and others
for review.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/11587.1550975080@sss.pgh.pa.us
By sorting the active window list lexicographically by the sort clause
list but putting longer clauses before shorter prefixes, we generate
more chances to elide Sort nodes when building the path.
Author: Daniel Gustafsson (with some editorialization by me)
Reviewed-by: Alexander Kuzmenkov, Masahiko Sawada, Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/124A7F69-84CD-435B-BA0E-2695BE21E5C2%40yesql.se
The initial implementation of list_qsort(), from commit ab7271677,
re-used the ListCells of the input list while not touching the List
header. This meant that anybody who still had a pointer to the
original header would now be in possession of a corrupted list,
a problem that seems sure to bite us eventually.
One possible solution is to re-use the original List header as well,
giving the function the semantics of update-in-place. However, that
doesn't seem like a very good idea either given the way that the
function is used in the planner: create_path functions aren't normally
supposed to modify their input lists. It doesn't look like there would
be a problem today, but it's not hard to foresee a time when modifying
a list of Paths in-place could have side-effects on some other append
path.
On the whole, and in view of the likelihood that this function might
be used in other contexts in the future, it seems best to get rid of
the micro-optimization of re-using the input list cells. Just build
a new list.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16912.1515449066@sss.pgh.pa.us
When we create an Append node, we can spread out the workers over the
subplans instead of piling on to each subplan one at a time, which
should typically be a bit more efficient, both because the startup
cost of any plan executed entirely by one worker is paid only once and
also because of reduced contention. We can also construct Append
plans using a mix of partial and non-partial subplans, which may allow
for parallelism in places that otherwise couldn't support it.
Unfortunately, this patch doesn't handle the important case of
parallelizing UNION ALL by running each branch in a separate worker;
the executor infrastructure is added here, but more planner work is
needed.
Amit Khandekar, Robert Haas, Amul Sul, reviewed and tested by
Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Langote, Rafia Sabih, Amit Kapila, and
Rajkumar Raghuwanshi.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAJ3gD9dy0K_E8r727heqXoBmWZ83HwLFwdcaSSmBQ1+S+vRuUQ@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
So far we have worked around the fact that some very old compilers do
not support 'inline' functions by only using inline functions
conditionally (or not at all). Since such compilers are very rare by
now, we have decided to rely on inline functions from 9.6 onwards.
To avoid breaking these old compilers inline is defined away when not
supported. That'll cause "function x defined but not used" type of
warnings, but since nobody develops on such compilers anymore that's
ok.
This change in policy will allow us to more easily employ inline
functions.
I chose to remove code previously conditional on PG_USE_INLINE as it
seemed confusing to have code dependent on a define that's always
defined.
Blacklisting of compilers, like in c53f73879f, now has to be done
differently. A platform template can define PG_FORCE_DISABLE_INLINE to
force inline to be defined empty.
Discussion: 20150701161447.GB30708@awork2.anarazel.de
This SQL standard functionality allows to aggregate data by different
GROUP BY clauses at once. Each grouping set returns rows with columns
grouped by in other sets set to NULL.
This could previously be achieved by doing each grouping as a separate
query, conjoined by UNION ALLs. Besides being considerably more concise,
grouping sets will in many cases be faster, requiring only one scan over
the underlying data.
The current implementation of grouping sets only supports using sorting
for input. Individual sets that share a sort order are computed in one
pass. If there are sets that don't share a sort order, additional sort &
aggregation steps are performed. These additional passes are sourced by
the previous sort step; thus avoiding repeated scans of the source data.
The code is structured in a way that adding support for purely using
hash aggregation or a mix of hashing and sorting is possible. Sorting
was chosen to be supported first, as it is the most generic method of
implementation.
Instead of, as in an earlier versions of the patch, representing the
chain of sort and aggregation steps as full blown planner and executor
nodes, all but the first sort are performed inside the aggregation node
itself. This avoids the need to do some unusual gymnastics to handle
having to return aggregated and non-aggregated tuples from underlying
nodes, as well as having to shut down underlying nodes early to limit
memory usage. The optimizer still builds Sort/Agg node to describe each
phase, but they're not part of the plan tree, but instead additional
data for the aggregation node. They're a convenient and preexisting way
to describe aggregation and sorting. The first (and possibly only) sort
step is still performed as a separate execution step. That retains
similarity with existing group by plans, makes rescans fairly simple,
avoids very deep plans (leading to slow explains) and easily allows to
avoid the sorting step if the underlying data is sorted by other means.
A somewhat ugly side of this patch is having to deal with a grammar
ambiguity between the new CUBE keyword and the cube extension/functions
named cube (and rollup). To avoid breaking existing deployments of the
cube extension it has not been renamed, neither has cube been made a
reserved keyword. Instead precedence hacking is used to make GROUP BY
cube(..) refer to the CUBE grouping sets feature, and not the function
cube(). To actually group by a function cube(), unlikely as that might
be, the function name has to be quoted.
Needs a catversion bump because stored rules may change.
Author: Andrew Gierth and Atri Sharma, with contributions from Andres Freund
Reviewed-By: Andres Freund, Noah Misch, Tom Lane, Svenne Krap, Tomas
Vondra, Erik Rijkers, Marti Raudsepp, Pavel Stehule
Discussion: CAOeZVidmVRe2jU6aMk_5qkxnB7dfmPROzM7Ur8JPW5j8Y5X-Lw@mail.gmail.com
This SQL-standard feature allows a sub-SELECT yielding multiple columns
(but only one row) to be used to compute the new values of several columns
to be updated. While the same results can be had with an independent
sub-SELECT per column, such a workaround can require a great deal of
duplicated computation.
The standard actually says that the source for a multi-column assignment
could be any row-valued expression. The implementation used here is
tightly tied to our existing sub-SELECT support and can't handle other
cases; the Bison grammar would have some issues with them too. However,
I don't feel too bad about this since other cases can be converted into
sub-SELECTs. For instance, "SET (a,b,c) = row_valued_function(x)" could
be written "SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT * FROM row_valued_function(x))".
We already had those, but they forced modules to spell out the function
bodies twice. Eliminate some duplicates we had already grown.
Extracted from a somewhat larger patch from Andres Freund.
compilers, by applying a configure check to see if the compiler will accept
an unreferenced "static inline foo ..." function without warnings. It is
believed that such warnings are the only reason not to declare inlined
functions in headers, if the compiler understands "inline" at all.
Kurt Harriman
the old JOIN_IN code, but antijoins are new functionality.) Teach the planner
to convert appropriate EXISTS and NOT EXISTS subqueries into semi and anti
joins respectively. Also, LEFT JOINs with suitable upper-level IS NULL
filters are recognized as being anti joins. Unify the InClauseInfo and
OuterJoinInfo infrastructure into "SpecialJoinInfo". With that change,
it becomes possible to associate a SpecialJoinInfo with every join attempt,
which permits some cleanup of join selectivity estimation. That needs to be
taken much further than this patch does, but the next step is to change the
API for oprjoin selectivity functions, which seems like material for a
separate patch. So for the moment the output size estimates for semi and
especially anti joins are quite bogus.
Nathan Bossart
Bruce Momjian
David Rowley
Alvaro Herrera
Tom Lane
Tomas Vondra
Andrew Gierth
Robert Haas
Andres Freund
Peter Eisentraut
Magnus Hagander