Upcoming work intends to allow pluggable ways to introduce new ways of
storing table data. Accessing those table access methods from the
executor requires TupleTableSlots to be carry tuples in the native
format of such storage methods; otherwise there'll be a significant
conversion overhead.
Different access methods will require different data to store tuples
efficiently (just like virtual, minimal, heap already require fields
in TupleTableSlot). To allow that without requiring additional pointer
indirections, we want to have different structs (embedding
TupleTableSlot) for different types of slots. Thus different types of
slots are needed, which requires adapting creators of slots.
The slot that most efficiently can represent a type of tuple in an
executor node will often depend on the type of slot a child node
uses. Therefore we need to track the type of slot is returned by
nodes, so parent slots can create slots based on that.
Relatedly, JIT compilation of tuple deforming needs to know which type
of slot a certain expression refers to, so it can create an
appropriate deforming function for the type of tuple in the slot.
But not all nodes will only return one type of slot, e.g. an append
node will potentially return different types of slots for each of its
subplans.
Therefore add function that allows to query the type of a node's
result slot, and whether it'll always be the same type (whether it's
fixed). This can be queried using ExecGetResultSlotOps().
The scan, result, inner, outer type of slots are automatically
inferred from ExecInitScanTupleSlot(), ExecInitResultSlot(),
left/right subtrees respectively. If that's not correct for a node,
that can be overwritten using new fields in PlanState.
This commit does not introduce the actually abstracted implementation
of different kind of TupleTableSlots, that will be left for a followup
commit. The different types of slots introduced will, for now, still
use the same backing implementation.
While this already partially invalidates the big comment in
tuptable.h, it seems to make more sense to update it later, when the
different TupleTableSlot implementations actually exist.
Author: Ashutosh Bapat and Andres Freund, with changes by Amit Khandekar
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181105210039.hh4vvi4vwoq5ba2q@alap3.anarazel.de
Upcoming changes introduce further types of tuple table slots, in
preparation of making table storage pluggable. New storage methods
will have different representation of tuples, therefore the slot
accessor should refer explicitly to heap tuples.
Instead of just renaming the functions, split it into one function
that accepts heap tuples not residing in buffers, and one accepting
ones in buffers. Previously one function was used for both, but that
was a bit awkward already, and splitting will allow us to represent
slot types for tuples in buffers and normal memory separately.
This is split out from the patch introducing abstract slots, as this
largely consists out of mechanical changes.
Author: Ashutosh Bapat
Reviewed-By: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180220224318.gw4oe5jadhpmcdnm@alap3.anarazel.de
It's always been possible for index AMs to cache data across successive
amgettuple calls within a single SQL command: the IndexScanDesc.opaque
field is meant for precisely that. However, no comparable facility
exists for amortizing setup work across successive aminsert calls.
This patch adds such a feature and teaches GIN, GIST, and BRIN to use it
to amortize catalog lookups they'd previously been doing on every call.
(The other standard index AMs keep everything they need in the relcache,
so there's little to improve there.)
For GIN, the overall improvement in a statement that inserts many rows
can be as much as 10%, though it seems a bit less for the other two.
In addition, this makes a really significant difference in runtime
for CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS tests, since in those builds the repeated
catalog lookups are vastly more expensive.
The reason this has been hard up to now is that the aminsert function is
not passed any useful place to cache per-statement data. What I chose to
do is to add suitable fields to struct IndexInfo and pass that to aminsert.
That's not widening the index AM API very much because IndexInfo is already
within the ken of ambuild; in fact, by passing the same info to aminsert
as to ambuild, this is really removing an inconsistency in the AM API.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/27568.1486508680@sss.pgh.pa.us
If a row that potentially violates a deferred exclusion constraint is
HOT-updated later in the same transaction, the exclusion constraint would
be reported as violated when the check finally occurs, even if the row(s)
the new row originally conflicted with have since been removed. This
happened because the wrong TID was passed to check_exclusion_constraint(),
causing the live HOT-updated row to be seen as a conflicting row rather
than recognized as the row-under-test.
Per bug #13148 from Evan Martin. It's been broken since exclusion
constraints were invented, so back-patch to all supported branches.
The newly added ON CONFLICT clause allows to specify an alternative to
raising a unique or exclusion constraint violation error when inserting.
ON CONFLICT refers to constraints that can either be specified using a
inference clause (by specifying the columns of a unique constraint) or
by naming a unique or exclusion constraint. DO NOTHING avoids the
constraint violation, without touching the pre-existing row. DO UPDATE
SET ... [WHERE ...] updates the pre-existing tuple, and has access to
both the tuple proposed for insertion and the existing tuple; the
optional WHERE clause can be used to prevent an update from being
executed. The UPDATE SET and WHERE clauses have access to the tuple
proposed for insertion using the "magic" EXCLUDED alias, and to the
pre-existing tuple using the table name or its alias.
This feature is often referred to as upsert.
This is implemented using a new infrastructure called "speculative
insertion". It is an optimistic variant of regular insertion that first
does a pre-check for existing tuples and then attempts an insert. If a
violating tuple was inserted concurrently, the speculatively inserted
tuple is deleted and a new attempt is made. If the pre-check finds a
matching tuple the alternative DO NOTHING or DO UPDATE action is taken.
If the insertion succeeds without detecting a conflict, the tuple is
deemed inserted.
To handle the possible ambiguity between the excluded alias and a table
named excluded, and for convenience with long relation names, INSERT
INTO now can alias its target table.
Bumps catversion as stored rules change.
Author: Peter Geoghegan, with significant contributions from Heikki
Linnakangas and Andres Freund. Testing infrastructure by Jeff Janes.
Reviewed-By: Heikki Linnakangas, Andres Freund, Robert Haas, Simon Riggs,
Dean Rasheed, Stephen Frost and many others.
support any indexable commutative operator, not just equality. Two rows
violate the exclusion constraint if "row1.col OP row2.col" is TRUE for
each of the columns in the constraint.
Jeff Davis, reviewed by Robert Haas
The current implementation fires an AFTER ROW trigger for each tuple that
looks like it might be non-unique according to the index contents at the
time of insertion. This works well as long as there aren't many conflicts,
but won't scale to massive unique-key reassignments. Improving that case
is a TODO item.
Dean Rasheed
Bruce Momjian
Andres Freund
Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera
Magnus Hagander