Arrange to do some things on-demand, rather than immediately during
executor startup, because there's a fair chance of never having to do
them at all:
* Don't open result relations' indexes until needed.
* Don't initialize partition tuple routing, nor the child-to-root
tuple conversion map, until needed.
This wins in UPDATEs on partitioned tables when only some of the
partitions will actually receive updates; with larger partition
counts the savings is quite noticeable. Also, we can remove some
sketchy heuristics in ExecInitModifyTable about whether to set up
tuple routing.
Also, remove execPartition.c's private hash table tracking which
partitions were already opened by the ModifyTable node. Instead
use the hash added to ModifyTable itself by commit 86dc90056.
To allow lazy computation of the conversion maps, we now set
ri_RootResultRelInfo in all child ResultRelInfos. We formerly set it
only in some, not terribly well-defined, cases. This has user-visible
side effects in that now more error messages refer to the root
relation instead of some partition (and provide error data in the
root's column order, too). It looks to me like this is a strict
improvement in consistency, so I don't have a problem with the
output changes visible in this commit.
Extracted from a larger patch, which seemed to me to be too messy
to push in one commit.
Amit Langote, reviewed at different times by Heikki Linnakangas and
myself
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqG7ZruBmmih3wPsBZ4s0H2EhywrnXEduckY5Hr3fWzPWA@mail.gmail.com
Here we add a new executor node type named "Result Cache". The planner
can include this node type in the plan to have the executor cache the
results from the inner side of parameterized nested loop joins. This
allows caching of tuples for sets of parameters so that in the event that
the node sees the same parameter values again, it can just return the
cached tuples instead of rescanning the inner side of the join all over
again. Internally, result cache uses a hash table in order to quickly
find tuples that have been previously cached.
For certain data sets, this can significantly improve the performance of
joins. The best cases for using this new node type are for join problems
where a large portion of the tuples from the inner side of the join have
no join partner on the outer side of the join. In such cases, hash join
would have to hash values that are never looked up, thus bloating the hash
table and possibly causing it to multi-batch. Merge joins would have to
skip over all of the unmatched rows. If we use a nested loop join with a
result cache, then we only cache tuples that have at least one join
partner on the outer side of the join. The benefits of using a
parameterized nested loop with a result cache increase when there are
fewer distinct values being looked up and the number of lookups of each
value is large. Also, hash probes to lookup the cache can be much faster
than the hash probe in a hash join as it's common that the result cache's
hash table is much smaller than the hash join's due to result cache only
caching useful tuples rather than all tuples from the inner side of the
join. This variation in hash probe performance is more significant when
the hash join's hash table no longer fits into the CPU's L3 cache, but the
result cache's hash table does. The apparent "random" access of hash
buckets with each hash probe can cause a poor L3 cache hit ratio for large
hash tables. Smaller hash tables generally perform better.
The hash table used for the cache limits itself to not exceeding work_mem
* hash_mem_multiplier in size. We maintain a dlist of keys for this cache
and when we're adding new tuples and realize we've exceeded the memory
budget, we evict cache entries starting with the least recently used ones
until we have enough memory to add the new tuples to the cache.
For parameterized nested loop joins, we now consider using one of these
result cache nodes in between the nested loop node and its inner node. We
determine when this might be useful based on cost, which is primarily
driven off of what the expected cache hit ratio will be. Estimating the
cache hit ratio relies on having good distinct estimates on the nested
loop's parameters.
For now, the planner will only consider using a result cache for
parameterized nested loop joins. This works for both normal joins and
also for LATERAL type joins to subqueries. It is possible to use this new
node for other uses in the future. For example, to cache results from
correlated subqueries. However, that's not done here due to some
difficulties obtaining a distinct estimation on the outer plan to
calculate the estimated cache hit ratio. Currently we plan the inner plan
before planning the outer plan so there is no good way to know if a result
cache would be useful or not since we can't estimate the number of times
the subplan will be called until the outer plan is generated.
The functionality being added here is newly introducing a dependency on
the return value of estimate_num_groups() during the join search.
Previously, during the join search, we only ever needed to perform
selectivity estimations. With this commit, we need to use
estimate_num_groups() in order to estimate what the hit ratio on the
result cache will be. In simple terms, if we expect 10 distinct values
and we expect 1000 outer rows, then we'll estimate the hit ratio to be
99%. Since cache hits are very cheap compared to scanning the underlying
nodes on the inner side of the nested loop join, then this will
significantly reduce the planner's cost for the join. However, it's
fairly easy to see here that things will go bad when estimate_num_groups()
incorrectly returns a value that's significantly lower than the actual
number of distinct values. If this happens then that may cause us to make
use of a nested loop join with a result cache instead of some other join
type, such as a merge or hash join. Our distinct estimations have been
known to be a source of trouble in the past, so the extra reliance on them
here could cause the planner to choose slower plans than it did previous
to having this feature. Distinct estimations are also fairly hard to
estimate accurately when several tables have been joined already or when a
WHERE clause filters out a set of values that are correlated to the
expressions we're estimating the number of distinct value for.
For now, the costing we perform during query planning for result caches
does put quite a bit of faith in the distinct estimations being accurate.
When these are accurate then we should generally see faster execution
times for plans containing a result cache. However, in the real world, we
may find that we need to either change the costings to put less trust in
the distinct estimations being accurate or perhaps even disable this
feature by default. There's always an element of risk when we teach the
query planner to do new tricks that it decides to use that new trick at
the wrong time and causes a regression. Users may opt to get the old
behavior by turning the feature off using the enable_resultcache GUC.
Currently, this is enabled by default. It remains to be seen if we'll
maintain that setting for the release.
Additionally, the name "Result Cache" is the best name I could think of
for this new node at the time I started writing the patch. Nobody seems
to strongly dislike the name. A few people did suggest other names but no
other name seemed to dominate in the brief discussion that there was about
names. Let's allow the beta period to see if the current name pleases
enough people. If there's some consensus on a better name, then we can
change it before the release. Please see the 2nd discussion link below
for the discussion on the "Result Cache" name.
Author: David Rowley
Reviewed-by: Andy Fan, Justin Pryzby, Zhihong Yu, Hou Zhijie
Tested-By: Konstantin Knizhnik
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvrPcQyQdWERGYWx8J%2B2DLUNgXu%2BfOSbQ1UscxrunyXyrQ%40mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvq=yQXr5kqhRviT2RhNKwToaWr9JAN5t+5_PzhuRJ3wvg@mail.gmail.com
This removes "Add Result Cache executor node". It seems that something
weird is going on with the tracking of cache hits and misses as
highlighted by many buildfarm animals. It's not yet clear what the
problem is as other parts of the plan indicate that the cache did work
correctly, it's just the hits and misses that were being reported as 0.
This is especially a bad time to have the buildfarm so broken, so
reverting before too many more animals go red.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvq_hydhfovm4=izgWs+C5HqEeRScjMbOgbpC-jRAeK3Yw@mail.gmail.com
Here we add a new executor node type named "Result Cache". The planner
can include this node type in the plan to have the executor cache the
results from the inner side of parameterized nested loop joins. This
allows caching of tuples for sets of parameters so that in the event that
the node sees the same parameter values again, it can just return the
cached tuples instead of rescanning the inner side of the join all over
again. Internally, result cache uses a hash table in order to quickly
find tuples that have been previously cached.
For certain data sets, this can significantly improve the performance of
joins. The best cases for using this new node type are for join problems
where a large portion of the tuples from the inner side of the join have
no join partner on the outer side of the join. In such cases, hash join
would have to hash values that are never looked up, thus bloating the hash
table and possibly causing it to multi-batch. Merge joins would have to
skip over all of the unmatched rows. If we use a nested loop join with a
result cache, then we only cache tuples that have at least one join
partner on the outer side of the join. The benefits of using a
parameterized nested loop with a result cache increase when there are
fewer distinct values being looked up and the number of lookups of each
value is large. Also, hash probes to lookup the cache can be much faster
than the hash probe in a hash join as it's common that the result cache's
hash table is much smaller than the hash join's due to result cache only
caching useful tuples rather than all tuples from the inner side of the
join. This variation in hash probe performance is more significant when
the hash join's hash table no longer fits into the CPU's L3 cache, but the
result cache's hash table does. The apparent "random" access of hash
buckets with each hash probe can cause a poor L3 cache hit ratio for large
hash tables. Smaller hash tables generally perform better.
The hash table used for the cache limits itself to not exceeding work_mem
* hash_mem_multiplier in size. We maintain a dlist of keys for this cache
and when we're adding new tuples and realize we've exceeded the memory
budget, we evict cache entries starting with the least recently used ones
until we have enough memory to add the new tuples to the cache.
For parameterized nested loop joins, we now consider using one of these
result cache nodes in between the nested loop node and its inner node. We
determine when this might be useful based on cost, which is primarily
driven off of what the expected cache hit ratio will be. Estimating the
cache hit ratio relies on having good distinct estimates on the nested
loop's parameters.
For now, the planner will only consider using a result cache for
parameterized nested loop joins. This works for both normal joins and
also for LATERAL type joins to subqueries. It is possible to use this new
node for other uses in the future. For example, to cache results from
correlated subqueries. However, that's not done here due to some
difficulties obtaining a distinct estimation on the outer plan to
calculate the estimated cache hit ratio. Currently we plan the inner plan
before planning the outer plan so there is no good way to know if a result
cache would be useful or not since we can't estimate the number of times
the subplan will be called until the outer plan is generated.
The functionality being added here is newly introducing a dependency on
the return value of estimate_num_groups() during the join search.
Previously, during the join search, we only ever needed to perform
selectivity estimations. With this commit, we need to use
estimate_num_groups() in order to estimate what the hit ratio on the
result cache will be. In simple terms, if we expect 10 distinct values
and we expect 1000 outer rows, then we'll estimate the hit ratio to be
99%. Since cache hits are very cheap compared to scanning the underlying
nodes on the inner side of the nested loop join, then this will
significantly reduce the planner's cost for the join. However, it's
fairly easy to see here that things will go bad when estimate_num_groups()
incorrectly returns a value that's significantly lower than the actual
number of distinct values. If this happens then that may cause us to make
use of a nested loop join with a result cache instead of some other join
type, such as a merge or hash join. Our distinct estimations have been
known to be a source of trouble in the past, so the extra reliance on them
here could cause the planner to choose slower plans than it did previous
to having this feature. Distinct estimations are also fairly hard to
estimate accurately when several tables have been joined already or when a
WHERE clause filters out a set of values that are correlated to the
expressions we're estimating the number of distinct value for.
For now, the costing we perform during query planning for result caches
does put quite a bit of faith in the distinct estimations being accurate.
When these are accurate then we should generally see faster execution
times for plans containing a result cache. However, in the real world, we
may find that we need to either change the costings to put less trust in
the distinct estimations being accurate or perhaps even disable this
feature by default. There's always an element of risk when we teach the
query planner to do new tricks that it decides to use that new trick at
the wrong time and causes a regression. Users may opt to get the old
behavior by turning the feature off using the enable_resultcache GUC.
Currently, this is enabled by default. It remains to be seen if we'll
maintain that setting for the release.
Additionally, the name "Result Cache" is the best name I could think of
for this new node at the time I started writing the patch. Nobody seems
to strongly dislike the name. A few people did suggest other names but no
other name seemed to dominate in the brief discussion that there was about
names. Let's allow the beta period to see if the current name pleases
enough people. If there's some consensus on a better name, then we can
change it before the release. Please see the 2nd discussion link below
for the discussion on the "Result Cache" name.
Author: David Rowley
Reviewed-by: Andy Fan, Justin Pryzby, Zhihong Yu
Tested-By: Konstantin Knizhnik
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvrPcQyQdWERGYWx8J%2B2DLUNgXu%2BfOSbQ1UscxrunyXyrQ%40mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvq=yQXr5kqhRviT2RhNKwToaWr9JAN5t+5_PzhuRJ3wvg@mail.gmail.com
This patch makes two closely related sets of changes:
1. For UPDATE, the subplan of the ModifyTable node now only delivers
the new values of the changed columns (i.e., the expressions computed
in the query's SET clause) plus row identity information such as CTID.
ModifyTable must re-fetch the original tuple to merge in the old
values of any unchanged columns. The core advantage of this is that
the changed columns are uniform across all tables of an inherited or
partitioned target relation, whereas the other columns might not be.
A secondary advantage, when the UPDATE involves joins, is that less
data needs to pass through the plan tree. The disadvantage of course
is an extra fetch of each tuple to be updated. However, that seems to
be very nearly free in context; even worst-case tests don't show it to
add more than a couple percent to the total query cost. At some point
it might be interesting to combine the re-fetch with the tuple access
that ModifyTable must do anyway to mark the old tuple dead; but that
would require a good deal of refactoring and it seems it wouldn't buy
all that much, so this patch doesn't attempt it.
2. For inherited UPDATE/DELETE, instead of generating a separate
subplan for each target relation, we now generate a single subplan
that is just exactly like a SELECT's plan, then stick ModifyTable
on top of that. To let ModifyTable know which target relation a
given incoming row refers to, a tableoid junk column is added to
the row identity information. This gets rid of the horrid hack
that was inheritance_planner(), eliminating O(N^2) planning cost
and memory consumption in cases where there were many unprunable
target relations.
Point 2 of course requires point 1, so that there is a uniform
definition of the non-junk columns to be returned by the subplan.
We can't insist on uniform definition of the row identity junk
columns however, if we want to keep the ability to have both
plain and foreign tables in a partitioning hierarchy. Since
it wouldn't scale very far to have every child table have its
own row identity column, this patch includes provisions to merge
similar row identity columns into one column of the subplan result.
In particular, we can merge the whole-row Vars typically used as
row identity by FDWs into one column by pretending they are type
RECORD. (It's still okay for the actual composite Datums to be
labeled with the table's rowtype OID, though.)
There is more that can be done to file down residual inefficiencies
in this patch, but it seems to be committable now.
FDW authors should note several API changes:
* The argument list for AddForeignUpdateTargets() has changed, and so
has the method it must use for adding junk columns to the query. Call
add_row_identity_var() instead of manipulating the parse tree directly.
You might want to reconsider exactly what you're adding, too.
* PlanDirectModify() must now work a little harder to find the
ForeignScan plan node; if the foreign table is part of a partitioning
hierarchy then the ForeignScan might not be the direct child of
ModifyTable. See postgres_fdw for sample code.
* To check whether a relation is a target relation, it's no
longer sufficient to compare its relid to root->parse->resultRelation.
Instead, check it against all_result_relids or leaf_result_relids,
as appropriate.
Amit Langote and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqHpHdqdDn48yCEhynnniahH78rwcrv1rEX65-fsZGBOLQ@mail.gmail.com
This implements asynchronous execution, which runs multiple parts of a
non-parallel-aware Append concurrently rather than serially to improve
performance when possible. Currently, the only node type that can be
run concurrently is a ForeignScan that is an immediate child of such an
Append. In the case where such ForeignScans access data on different
remote servers, this would run those ForeignScans concurrently, and
overlap the remote operations to be performed simultaneously, so it'll
improve the performance especially when the operations involve
time-consuming ones such as remote join and remote aggregation.
We may extend this to other node types such as joins or aggregates over
ForeignScans in the future.
This also adds the support for postgres_fdw, which is enabled by the
table-level/server-level option "async_capable". The default is false.
Robert Haas, Kyotaro Horiguchi, Thomas Munro, and myself. This commit
is mostly based on the patch proposed by Robert Haas, but also uses
stuff from the patch proposed by Kyotaro Horiguchi and from the patch
proposed by Thomas Munro. Reviewed by Kyotaro Horiguchi, Konstantin
Knizhnik, Andrey Lepikhov, Movead Li, Thomas Munro, Justin Pryzby, and
others.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA%2BTgmoaXQEt4tZ03FtQhnzeDEMzBck%2BLrni0UWHVVgOTnA6C1w%40mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA%2BhUKGLBRyu0rHrDCMC4%3DRn3252gogyp1SjOgG8SEKKZv%3DFwfQ%40mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200228.170650.667613673625155850.horikyota.ntt%40gmail.com
This adds a new executor node named TID Range Scan. The query planner
will generate paths for TID Range scans when quals are discovered on base
relations which search for ranges on the table's ctid column. These
ranges may be open at either end. For example, WHERE ctid >= '(10,0)';
will return all tuples on page 10 and over.
To support this, two new optional callback functions have been added to
table AM. scan_set_tidrange is used to set the scan range to just the
given range of TIDs. scan_getnextslot_tidrange fetches the next tuple
in the given range.
For AMs were scanning ranges of TIDs would not make sense, these functions
can be set to NULL in the TableAmRoutine. The query planner won't
generate TID Range Scan Paths in that case.
Author: Edmund Horner, David Rowley
Reviewed-by: David Rowley, Tomas Vondra, Tom Lane, Andres Freund, Zhihong Yu
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMyN-kB-nFTkF=VA_JPwFNo08S0d-Yk0F741S2B7LDmYAi8eyA@mail.gmail.com
If ExecGetInsertedCols(), ExecGetUpdatedCols() or ExecGetExtraUpdatedCols()
were called with a ResultRelInfo that's not in the range table and isn't a
partition routing target, the functions would dereference a NULL pointer,
relinfo->ri_RootResultRelInfo. Such ResultRelInfos are created when firing
RI triggers in tables that are not modified directly. None of the current
callers of these functions pass such relations, so this isn't a live bug,
but let's make them more robust.
Also update comment in ResultRelInfo; after commit 6214e2b228,
ri_RangeTableIndex is zero for ResultRelInfos created for partition tuple
routing.
Noted by Coverity. Backpatch down to v11, like commit 6214e2b228.
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Amit Langote
If a cross-partition UPDATE violates a constraint on the target partition,
and the columns in the new partition are in different physical order than
in the parent, the error message can reveal columns that the user does not
have SELECT permission on. A similar bug was fixed earlier in commit
804b6b6db4.
The cause of the bug is that the callers of the
ExecBuildSlotValueDescription() function got confused when constructing
the list of modified columns. If the tuple was routed from a parent, we
converted the tuple to the parent's format, but the list of modified
columns was grabbed directly from the child's RTE entry.
ExecUpdateLockMode() had a similar issue. That lead to confusion on which
columns are key columns, leading to wrong tuple lock being taken on tables
referenced by foreign keys, when a row is updated with INSERT ON CONFLICT
UPDATE. A new isolation test is added for that corner case.
With this patch, the ri_RangeTableIndex field is no longer set for
partitions that don't have an entry in the range table. Previously, it was
set to the RTE entry of the parent relation, but that was confusing.
NOTE: This modifies the ResultRelInfo struct, replacing the
ri_PartitionRoot field with ri_RootResultRelInfo. That's a bit risky to
backpatch, because it breaks any extensions accessing the field. The
change that ri_RangeTableIndex is not set for partitions could potentially
break extensions, too. The ResultRelInfos are visible to FDWs at least,
and this patch required small changes to postgres_fdw. Nevertheless, this
seem like the least bad option. I don't think these fields widely used in
extensions; I don't think there are FDWs out there that uses the FDW
"direct update" API, other than postgres_fdw. If there is, you will get a
compilation error, so hopefully it is caught quickly.
Backpatch to 11, where support for both cross-partition UPDATEs, and unique
indexes on partitioned tables, were added.
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote
Security: CVE-2021-3393
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
Store the tuple conversion map to convert a tuple from a child table's
format to the root format in a new ri_ChildToRootMap field in
ResultRelInfo. It is initialized if transition tuple capture for FOR
STATEMENT triggers or INSERT tuple routing on a partitioned table is
needed. Previously, ModifyTable kept the maps in the per-subplan
ModifyTableState->mt_per_subplan_tupconv_maps array, or when tuple
routing was used, in
ResultRelInfo->ri_Partitioninfo->pi_PartitionToRootMap. The new field
replaces both of those.
Now that the child-to-root tuple conversion map is always available in
ResultRelInfo (when needed), remove the TransitionCaptureState.tcs_map
field. The callers of Exec*Trigger() functions no longer need to set or
save it, which is much less confusing and bug-prone. Also, as a future
optimization, this will allow us to delay creating the map for a given
result relation until the relation is actually processed during
execution.
Author: Amit Langote
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BHiwqHtCWLdK-LO%3DNEsvOdHx%2B7yv4mE_zYK0i3BH7dXb-wxog%40mail.gmail.com
When executing DDL on a partitioned table or on a table with inheritance
children, statement-level triggers must be fired against the table given
in the original statement. The code to look that up was a bit messy and
duplicative. Commit 501ed02cf6 added a helper function,
getASTriggerResultRelInfo() (later renamed to getTargetResultRelInfo())
for it, but for some reason it was only used when firing AFTER STATEMENT
triggers and the code to fire BEFORE STATEMENT triggers duplicated the
logic.
Determine the target relation in ExecInitModifyTable(), and set it always
in ModifyTableState. Code that used to call getTargetResultRelInfo() can
now use ModifyTableState->rootResultRelInfo directly.
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BHiwqFViT47Zbr_ASBejiK7iDG8%3DQ1swQ-tjM6caRPQ67pT%3Dw%40mail.gmail.com
Maintaining 'es_result_relation_info' correctly at all times has become
cumbersome, especially with partitioning where each partition gets its
own result relation info. Having to set and reset it across arbitrary
operations has caused bugs in the past.
This changes all the places that used 'es_result_relation_info', to
receive the currently active ResultRelInfo via function parameters
instead.
Author: Amit Langote
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BHiwqGEmiib8FLiHMhKB%2BCH5dRgHSLc5N5wnvc4kym%2BZYpQEQ%40mail.gmail.com
FDWs that can perform an UPDATE/DELETE remotely using the "direct modify"
set of APIs need to access the ResultRelInfo of the target table. That's
currently available in EState.es_result_relation_info, but the next
commit will remove that field.
This commit adds a new resultRelation field in ForeignScan, to store the
target relation's RT index, and the corresponding ResultRelInfo in
ForeignScanState. The FDW's PlanDirectModify callback is expected to set
'resultRelation' along with 'operation'. The core code doesn't need them
for anything, they are for the convenience of FDW's Begin- and
IterateDirectModify callbacks.
Authors: Amit Langote, Etsuro Fujita
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BHiwqGEmiib8FLiHMhKB%2BCH5dRgHSLc5N5wnvc4kym%2BZYpQEQ%40mail.gmail.com
Instead of allocating all the ResultRelInfos upfront in one big array,
allocate them in ExecInitModifyTable(). es_result_relations is now an
array of ResultRelInfo pointers, rather than an array of structs, and it
is indexed by the RT index.
This simplifies things: we get rid of the separate concept of a "result
rel index", and don't need to set it in setrefs.c anymore. This also
allows follow-up optimizations (not included in this commit yet) to skip
initializing ResultRelInfos for target relations that were not needed at
runtime, and removal of the es_result_relation_info pointer.
The EState arrays of regular result rels and root result rels are merged
into one array. Similarly, the resultRelations and rootResultRelations
lists in PlannedStmt are merged into one. It's not actually clear to me
why they were kept separate in the first place, but now that the
es_result_relations array is indexed by RT index, it certainly seems
pointless.
The PlannedStmt->resultRelations list is now only needed for
ExecRelationIsTargetRelation(). One visible effect of this change is that
ExecRelationIsTargetRelation() will now return 'true' also for the
partition root, if a partitioned table is updated. That seems like a good
thing, although the function isn't used in core code, and I don't see any
reason for an FDW to call it on a partition root.
Author: Amit Langote
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BHiwqGEmiib8FLiHMhKB%2BCH5dRgHSLc5N5wnvc4kym%2BZYpQEQ%40mail.gmail.com
When commit bd3daddaf introduced AlternativeSubPlans, I had some
ambitions towards allowing the choice of subplan to change during
execution. That has not happened, or even been thought about, in the
ensuing twelve years; so it seems like a failed experiment. So let's
rip that out and resolve the choice of subplan at the end of planning
(in setrefs.c) rather than during executor startup. This has a number
of positive benefits:
* Removal of a few hundred lines of executor code, since
AlternativeSubPlans need no longer be supported there.
* Removal of executor-startup overhead (particularly, initialization
of subplans that won't be used).
* Removal of incidental costs of having a larger plan tree, such as
tree-scanning and copying costs in the plancache; not to mention
setrefs.c's own costs of processing the discarded subplans.
* EXPLAIN no longer has to print a weird (and undocumented)
representation of an AlternativeSubPlan choice; it sees only the
subplan actually used. This should mean less confusion for users.
* Since setrefs.c knows which subexpression of a plan node it's
working on at any instant, it's possible to adjust the estimated
number of executions of the subplan based on that. For example,
we should usually estimate more executions of a qual expression
than a targetlist expression. The implementation used here is
pretty simplistic, because we don't want to expend a lot of cycles
on the issue; but it's better than ignoring the point entirely,
as the executor had to.
That last point might possibly result in shifting the choice
between hashed and non-hashed EXISTS subplans in a few cases,
but in general this patch isn't meant to change planner choices.
Since we're doing the resolution so late, it's really impossible
to change any plan choices outside the AlternativeSubPlan itself.
Patch by me; thanks to David Rowley for review.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1992952.1592785225@sss.pgh.pa.us
Since there is only one place that actually needs the partition check
expression, namely ExecPartitionCheck, it's better to fetch it from
the relcache there. In this way we will never fetch it at all if
the query never has use for it, and we still fetch it just once when
we do need it.
The reason for taking an interest in this is that if the relcache
doesn't already have the check expression cached, fetching it
requires obtaining AccessShareLock on the partition root. That
means that operations that look like they should only touch the
partition itself will also take a lock on the root. In particular
we observed that TRUNCATE on a partition may take a lock on the
partition's root, contributing to a deadlock situation in parallel
pg_restore.
As written, this patch does have a small cost, which is that we
are microscopically reducing efficiency for the case where a partition
has an empty check expression. ExecPartitionCheck will be called,
and will go through the motions of setting up and checking an empty
qual, where before it would not have been called at all. We could
avoid that by adding a separate boolean flag to track whether there
is a partition expression to test. However, this case only arises
for a default partition with no siblings, which surely is not an
interesting case in practice. Hence adding complexity for it
does not seem like a good trade-off.
Amit Langote, per a suggestion by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/VI1PR03MB31670CA1BD9625C3A8C5DD05EB230@VI1PR03MB3167.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com
nodeSubplan.c expects that the testexpr for a hashable ANY SubPlan
has the form of one or more OpExprs whose LHS is an expression of the
outer query's, while the RHS is an expression over Params representing
output columns of the subquery. However, the planner only went as far
as verifying that the clauses were all binary OpExprs. This works
99.99% of the time, because the clauses have the right shape when
emitted by the parser --- but it's possible for function inlining to
break that, as reported by PegoraroF10. To fix, teach the planner
to check that the LHS and RHS contain the right things, or more
accurately don't contain the wrong things. Given that this has been
broken for years without anyone noticing, it seems sufficient to just
give up hashing when it happens, rather than go to the trouble of
commuting the clauses back again (which wouldn't necessarily work
anyway).
While poking at that, I also noticed that nodeSubplan.c had a baked-in
assumption that the number of hash clauses is identical to the number
of subquery output columns. Again, that's fine as far as parser output
goes, but it's not hard to break it via function inlining. There seems
little reason for that assumption though --- AFAICS, the only thing
it's buying us is not having to store the number of hash clauses
explicitly. Adding code to the planner to reject such cases would take
more code than getting nodeSubplan.c to cope, so I fixed it that way.
This has been broken for as long as we've had hashable SubPlans,
so back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1549209182255-0.post@n3.nabble.com
Since 1f39bce02, HashAgg nodes have had the ability to spill to disk when
memory consumption exceeds work_mem. That commit added new properties to
EXPLAIN ANALYZE to show the maximum memory usage and disk usage, however,
it didn't quite go as far as showing that information for parallel
workers. Since workers may have experienced something very different from
the main process, we should show this information per worker, as is done
in Sort.
Reviewed-by: Justin Pryzby
Reviewed-by: Jeff Davis
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvpEKbfZa18mM1TD7qV6PG+w97pwCWq5tVD0dX7e11gRJw@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 13, where the hashagg spilling code was added.
Includes some manual cleanup of places that pgindent messed up,
most of which weren't per project style anyway.
Notably, it seems some people didn't absorb the style rules of
commit c9d297751, because there were a bunch of new occurrences
of function calls with a newline just after the left paren, all
with faulty expectations about how the rest of the call would get
indented.
Before discarding the old hash table in ExecReScanHashJoin, capture
its statistics, ensuring that we report the maximum hashtable size
across repeated rescans of the hash input relation. We can repurpose
the existing code for reporting hashtable size in parallel workers
to help with this, making the patch pretty small. This also ensures
that if rescans happen within parallel workers, we get the correct
maximums across all instances.
Konstantin Knizhnik and Tom Lane, per diagnosis by Thomas Munro
of a trouble report from Alvaro Herrera.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200323165059.GA24950@alvherre.pgsql
WITH TIES is an option to the FETCH FIRST N ROWS clause (the SQL
standard's spelling of LIMIT), where you additionally get rows that
compare equal to the last of those N rows by the columns in the
mandatory ORDER BY clause.
There was a proposal by Andrew Gierth to implement this functionality in
a more powerful way that would yield more features, but the other patch
had not been finished at this time, so we decided to use this one for
now in the spirit of incremental development.
Author: Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CALAY4q9ky7rD_A4vf=FVQvCGngm3LOes-ky0J6euMrg=_Se+ag@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87o8wvz253.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
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
PostgreSQL provides set of template index access methods, where opclasses have
much freedom in the semantics of indexing. These index AMs are GiST, GIN,
SP-GiST and BRIN. There opclasses define representation of keys, operations on
them and supported search strategies. So, it's natural that opclasses may be
faced some tradeoffs, which require user-side decision. This commit implements
opclass parameters allowing users to set some values, which tell opclass how to
index the particular dataset.
This commit doesn't introduce new storage in system catalog. Instead it uses
pg_attribute.attoptions, which is used for table column storage options but
unused for index attributes.
In order to evade changing signature of each opclass support function, we
implement unified way to pass options to opclass support functions. Options
are set to fn_expr as the constant bytea expression. It's possible due to the
fact that opclass support functions are executed outside of expressions, so
fn_expr is unused for them.
This commit comes with some examples of opclass options usage. We parametrize
signature length in GiST. That applies to multiple opclasses: tsvector_ops,
gist__intbig_ops, gist_ltree_ops, gist__ltree_ops, gist_trgm_ops and
gist_hstore_ops. Also we parametrize maximum number of integer ranges for
gist__int_ops. However, the main future usage of this feature is expected
to be json, where users would be able to specify which way to index particular
json parts.
Catversion is bumped.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/d22c3a18-31c7-1879-fc11-4c1ce2f5e5af%40postgrespro.ru
Author: Nikita Glukhov, revised by me
Reviwed-by: Nikolay Shaplov, Robert Haas, Tom Lane, Tomas Vondra, Alvaro Herrera
While performing hash aggregation, track memory usage when adding new
groups to a hash table. If the memory usage exceeds work_mem, enter
"spill mode".
In spill mode, new groups are not created in the hash table(s), but
existing groups continue to be advanced if input tuples match. Tuples
that would cause a new group to be created are instead spilled to a
logical tape to be processed later.
The tuples are spilled in a partitioned fashion. When all tuples from
the outer plan are processed (either by advancing the group or
spilling the tuple), finalize and emit the groups from the hash
table. Then, create new batches of work from the spilled partitions,
and select one of the saved batches and process it (possibly spilling
recursively).
Author: Jeff Davis
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra, Adam Lee, Justin Pryzby, Taylor Vesely, Melanie Plageman
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/507ac540ec7c20136364b5272acbcd4574aa76ef.camel@j-davis.com
When updating a table row with generated columns, only recompute those
generated columns whose base columns have changed in this update and
keep the rest unchanged. This can result in a significant performance
benefit. The required information was already kept in
RangeTblEntry.extraUpdatedCols; we just have to make use of it.
Reviewed-by: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/b05e781a-fa16-6b52-6738-761181204567@2ndquadrant.com
It's already tracked via ExprState->parent, so we don't need to also
include it in ExprEvalStep. When that code originally was written
ExprState->parent didn't exist, but it since has been introduced in
6719b238e8.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20191023163849.sosqbfs5yenocez3@alap3.anarazel.de
Commit 9b63c13f0 turns out to have been fundamentally misguided:
the parent node's subPlan list is by no means the only way in which
a child SubPlan node can be hooked into the outer execution state.
As shown in bug #16213 from Matt Jibson, we can also get short-lived
tuple table slots added to the outer es_tupleTable list. At this point
I have little faith that there aren't other possible connections as
well; the long time it took to notice this problem shows that this
isn't a heavily-exercised situation.
Therefore, revert that fix, returning to the coding that passed a
NULL parent plan pointer down to the transiently-built subexpressions.
That gives us a pretty good guarantee that they won't hook into the
outer executor state in any way. But then we need some other solution
to make SubPlans work. Adopt the solution speculated about in the
previous commit's log message: do expression initialization at plan
startup for just those VALUES rows containing SubPlans, abandoning the
goal of reclaiming memory intra-query for those rows. In practice it
seems unlikely that queries containing a vast number of VALUES rows
would be using SubPlans in them, so this should not give up much.
(BTW, this test case also refutes my claim in connection with the prior
commit that the issue only arises with use of LATERAL. That was just
wrong: some variants of SubLink always produce SubPlans.)
As with previous patch, back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16213-871ac3bc208ecf23@postgresql.org
Previously, if the startup pruning logic proved that all child nodes
of an Append or MergeAppend could be pruned, we still kept one, just
to keep EXPLAIN from failing. The previous commit removed the
ruleutils.c limitation that required this kluge, so drop it. That
results in less-confusing EXPLAIN output, as per a complaint from
Yuzuko Hosoya.
David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/001001d4f44b$2a2cca50$7e865ef0$@lab.ntt.co.jp
This patch causes EXPLAIN to always assign a separate table alias to the
parent RTE of an append relation (inheritance set); before, such RTEs
were ignored if not actually scanned by the plan. Since the child RTEs
now always have that same alias to start with (cf. commit 55a1954da),
the net effect is that the parent RTE usually gets the alias used or
implied by the query text, and the children all get that alias with "_N"
appended. (The exception to "usually" is if there are duplicate aliases
in different subtrees of the original query; then some of those original
RTEs will also have "_N" appended.)
This results in more uniform output for partitioned-table plans than
we had before: the partitioned table itself gets the original alias,
and all child tables have aliases with "_N", rather than the previous
behavior where one of the children would get an alias without "_N".
The reason for giving the parent RTE an alias, even if it isn't scanned
by the plan, is that we now use the parent's alias to qualify Vars that
refer to an appendrel output column and appear above the Append or
MergeAppend that computes the appendrel. But below the append, Vars
refer to some one of the child relations, and are displayed that way.
This seems clearer than the old behavior where a Var that could carry
values from any child relation was displayed as if it referred to only
one of them.
While at it, change ruleutils.c so that the code paths used by EXPLAIN
deal in Plan trees not PlanState trees. This effectively reverts a
decision made in commit 1cc29fe7c, which seemed like a good idea at
the time to make ruleutils.c consistent with explain.c. However,
it's problematic because we'd really like to allow executor startup
pruning to remove all the children of an append node when possible,
leaving no child PlanState to resolve Vars against. (That's not done
here, but will be in the next patch.) This requires different handling
of subplans and initplans than before, but is otherwise a pretty
straightforward change.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/001001d4f44b$2a2cca50$7e865ef0$@lab.ntt.co.jp
In ad0bda5d24 I changed the EvalPlanQual machinery to store
substitution tuples in slot, instead of using plain HeapTuples. The
main motivation for that was that using HeapTuples will be inefficient
for future tableams. But it turns out that that conversion was buggy
for non-locking rowmarks - the wrong tuple descriptor was used to
create the slot.
As a secondary issue 5db6df0c0 changed ExecLockRows() to begin EPQ
earlier, to allow to fetch the locked rows directly into the EPQ
slots, instead of having to copy tuples around. Unfortunately, as Tom
complained, that forces some expensive initialization to happen
earlier.
As a third issue, the test coverage for EPQ was clearly insufficient.
Fixing the first issue is unfortunately not trivial: Non-locked row
marks were fetched at the start of EPQ, and we don't have the type
information for the rowmarks available at that point. While we could
change that, it's not easy. It might be worthwhile to change that at
some point, but to fix this bug, it seems better to delay fetching
non-locking rowmarks when they're actually needed, rather than
eagerly. They're referenced at most once, and in cases where EPQ
fails, might never be referenced. Fetching them when needed also
increases locality a bit.
To be able to fetch rowmarks during execution, rather than
initialization, we need to be able to access the active EPQState, as
that contains necessary data. To do so move EPQ related data from
EState to EPQState, and, only for EStates creates as part of EPQ,
reference the associated EPQState from EState.
To fix the second issue, change EPQ initialization to allow use of
EvalPlanQualSlot() to be used before EvalPlanQualBegin() (but
obviously still requiring EvalPlanQualInit() to have been done).
As these changes made struct EState harder to understand, e.g. by
adding multiple EStates, significantly reorder the members, and add a
lot more comments.
Also add a few more EPQ tests, including one that fails for the first
issue above. More is needed.
Reported-By: yi huang
Author: Andres Freund
Reviewed-By: Tom Lane
Discussion:
https://postgr.es/m/CAHU7rYZo_C4ULsAx_LAj8az9zqgrD8WDd4hTegDTMM1LMqrBsg@mail.gmail.comhttps://postgr.es/m/24530.1562686693@sss.pgh.pa.us
Backpatch: 12-, where the EPQ changes were introduced
Now that list_nth is O(1), there's no good reason to maintain a
separate array of RTE pointers rather than indexing into
estate->es_range_table. Deleting the array doesn't save all that
much either; but just on cleanliness grounds, it's better not to
have duplicate representations of the identical information.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/14960.1565384592@sss.pgh.pa.us
In 5f32b29c18 I changed the creation of HashState.hashkeys to
actually use HashState as the parent (instead of HashJoinState, which
was incorrect, as they were executed below HashState), to fix the
problem of hashkeys expressions otherwise relying on slot types
appropriate for HashJoinState, rather than HashState as would be
correct. That reliance was only introduced in 12, which is why it
previously worked to use HashJoinState as the parent (although I'd be
unsurprised if there were problematic cases).
Unfortunately that's not a sufficient solution, because before this
commit, the to-be-hashed expressions referenced inner/outer as
appropriate for the HashJoin, not Hash. That didn't have obvious bad
consequences, because the slots containing the tuples were put into
ecxt_innertuple when hashing a tuple for HashState (even though Hash
doesn't have an inner plan).
There are less common cases where this can cause visible problems
however (rather than just confusion when inspecting such executor
trees). E.g. "ERROR: bogus varno: 65000", when explaining queries
containing a HashJoin where the subsidiary Hash node's hash keys
reference a subplan. While normally hashkeys aren't displayed by
EXPLAIN, if one of those expressions references a subplan, that
subplan may be printed as part of the Hash node - which then failed
because an inner plan was referenced, and Hash doesn't have that.
It seems quite possible that there's other broken cases, too.
Fix the problem by properly splitting the expression for the HashJoin
and Hash nodes at plan time, and have them reference the proper
subsidiary node. While other workarounds are possible, fixing this
correctly seems easy enough. It was a pretty ugly hack to have
ExecInitHashJoin put the expression into the already initialized
HashState, in the first place.
I decided to not just split inner/outer hashkeys inside
make_hashjoin(), but also to separate out hashoperators and
hashcollations at plan time. Otherwise we would have ended up having
two very similar loops, one at plan time and the other during executor
startup. The work seems to more appropriately belong to plan time,
anyway.
Reported-By: Nikita Glukhov, Alexander Korotkov
Author: Andres Freund
Reviewed-By: Tom Lane, in an earlier version
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPpHfdvGVegF_TKKRiBrSmatJL2dR9uwFCuR+teQ_8tEXU8mxg@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 12-
This addresses a couple of issues in the code:
- Typos and inconsistencies in comments and function declarations.
- Removal of unreferenced function declarations.
- Removal of unnecessary compile flags.
- A cleanup error in regressplans.sh.
Author: Alexander Lakhin
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/0c991fdf-2670-1997-c027-772a420c4604@gmail.com
We used the same slot to store a tuple from the index, and to store a
tuple from the table. That's not OK. It worked with the heap, because
heapam_getnextslot() stores a HeapTuple to the slot, and doesn't care how
large the tts_values/nulls arrays are. But when I played with a toy table
AM implementation that used a virtual tuple, it caused memory overruns.
In the passing, tidy up comments on the ioss_PscanLen fields.
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
Tom Lane
David Rowley
Etsuro Fujita
Heikki Linnakangas
Tomas Vondra
Bruce Momjian
Jeff Davis
Andres Freund
Alvaro Herrera
Alexander Korotkov
Peter Eisentraut
Amit Kapila
Michael Paquier