It is frequently useful for volatile, set-returning, or expensive functions
in a SELECT's targetlist to be postponed till after ORDER BY and LIMIT are
done. Otherwise, the functions might be executed for every row of the
table despite the presence of LIMIT, and/or be executed in an unexpected
order. For example, in
SELECT x, nextval('seq') FROM tab ORDER BY x LIMIT 10;
it's probably desirable that the nextval() values are ordered the same
as x, and that nextval() is not run more than 10 times.
In the past, Postgres was inconsistent in this area: you would get the
desirable behavior if the ordering were performed via an indexscan, but
not if it had to be done by an explicit sort step. Getting the desired
behavior reliably required contortions like
SELECT x, nextval('seq')
FROM (SELECT x FROM tab ORDER BY x) ss LIMIT 10;
This patch conditionally postpones evaluation of pure-output target
expressions (that is, those that are not used as DISTINCT, ORDER BY, or
GROUP BY columns) so that they effectively occur after sorting, even if an
explicit sort step is necessary. Volatile expressions and set-returning
expressions are always postponed, so as to provide consistent semantics.
Expensive expressions (costing more than 10 times typical operator cost,
which by default would include any user-defined function) are postponed
if there is a LIMIT or if there are expressions that must be postponed.
We could be more aggressive and postpone any nontrivial expression, but
there are costs associated with doing so: it requires an extra Result plan
node which adds some overhead, and postponement changes the volume of data
going through the sort step, perhaps for the worse. Since we tend not to
have very good estimates of the output width of nontrivial expressions,
it's hard to have much confidence in our ability to predict whether
postponement would increase or decrease the cost of the sort; therefore
this patch doesn't attempt to make decisions conditionally on that.
Between these factors and a general desire not to change query behavior
when there's not a demonstrable benefit, it seems best to be conservative
about applying postponement. We might tweak the decision rules in the
future, though.
Konstantin Knizhnik, heavily rewritten by me
recompute the limit/offset immediately, so that the updated values are
available when the child's ReScan function is invoked. Add a regression
test for this, too. Bug is new in HEAD (due to the bounded-sorting patch)
so no need for back-patch.
I did not do anything about merging this signaling with chgParam processing,
but if we were to do that we'd still need to compute the updated values
at this point rather than during the first ProcNode call.
Per observation and test case from Greg Stark, though I didn't use his patch.
Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut
Bruce Momjian
Thomas G. Lockhart
Jan Wieck