Commit Graph

272 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Alvaro Herrera 7103ebb7aa
Add support for MERGE SQL command
MERGE performs actions that modify rows in the target table using a
source table or query. MERGE provides a single SQL statement that can
conditionally INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE rows -- a task that would otherwise
require multiple PL statements.  For example,

MERGE INTO target AS t
USING source AS s
ON t.tid = s.sid
WHEN MATCHED AND t.balance > s.delta THEN
  UPDATE SET balance = t.balance - s.delta
WHEN MATCHED THEN
  DELETE
WHEN NOT MATCHED AND s.delta > 0 THEN
  INSERT VALUES (s.sid, s.delta)
WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN
  DO NOTHING;

MERGE works with regular tables, partitioned tables and inheritance
hierarchies, including column and row security enforcement, as well as
support for row and statement triggers and transition tables therein.

MERGE is optimized for OLTP and is parameterizable, though also useful
for large scale ETL/ELT. MERGE is not intended to be used in preference
to existing single SQL commands for INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE since there
is some overhead.  MERGE can be used from PL/pgSQL.

MERGE does not support targetting updatable views or foreign tables, and
RETURNING clauses are not allowed either.  These limitations are likely
fixable with sufficient effort.  Rewrite rules are also not supported,
but it's not clear that we'd want to support them.

Author: Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Author: Simon Riggs <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Reviewed-by: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> (earlier versions)
Reviewed-by: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> (earlier versions)
Reviewed-by: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> (earlier versions)
Reviewed-by: Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
Reviewed-by: Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CANP8+jKitBSrB7oTgT9CY2i1ObfOt36z0XMraQc+Xrz8QB0nXA@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-WzkJdBuxj9PO=2QaO9-3h3xGbQPZ34kJH=HukRekwM-GZg@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20201231134736.GA25392@alvherre.pgsql
2022-03-28 16:47:48 +02:00
Bruce Momjian 27b77ecf9f Update copyright for 2022
Backpatch-through: 10
2022-01-07 19:04:57 -05:00
Tom Lane 9a3ddeb519 Fix index-only scan plans, take 2.
Commit 4ace45677 failed to fix the problem fully, because the
same issue of attempting to fetch a non-returnable index column
can occur when rechecking the indexqual after using a lossy index
operator.  Moreover, it broke EXPLAIN for such indexquals (which
indicates a gap in our test cases :-().

Revert the code changes of 4ace45677 in favor of adding a new field
to struct IndexOnlyScan, containing a version of the indexqual that
can be executed against the index-returned tuple without using any
non-returnable columns.  (The restrictions imposed by check_index_only
guarantee this is possible, although we may have to recompute indexed
expressions.)  Support construction of that during setrefs.c
processing by marking IndexOnlyScan.indextlist entries as resjunk
if they can't be returned, rather than removing them entirely.
(We could alternatively require setrefs.c to look up the IndexOptInfo
again, but abusing resjunk this way seems like a reasonably safe way
to avoid needing to do that.)

This solution isn't great from an API-stability standpoint: if there
are any extensions out there that build IndexOnlyScan structs directly,
they'll be broken in the next minor releases.  However, only a very
invasive extension would be likely to do such a thing.  There's no
change in the Path representation, so typical planner extensions
shouldn't have a problem.

As before, back-patch to all supported branches.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3179992.1641150853@sss.pgh.pa.us
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17350-b5bdcf476e5badbb@postgresql.org
2022-01-03 15:42:27 -05:00
Tom Lane 4ace456776 Fix index-only scan plans when not all index columns can be returned.
If an index has both returnable and non-returnable columns, and one of
the non-returnable columns is an expression using a Var that is in a
returnable column, then a query returning that expression could result
in an index-only scan plan that attempts to read the non-returnable
column, instead of recomputing the expression from the returnable
column as intended.

To fix, redefine the "indextlist" list of an IndexOnlyScan plan node
as containing null Consts in place of any non-returnable columns.
This solves the problem by preventing setrefs.c from falsely matching
to such entries.  The executor is happy since it only cares about the
exposed types of the entries, and ruleutils.c doesn't care because a
correct plan won't reference those entries.  I considered some other
ways to prevent setrefs.c from doing the wrong thing, but this way
seems good since (a) it allows a very localized fix, (b) it makes
the indextlist structure more compact in many cases, and (c) the
indextlist is now a more faithful representation of what the index AM
will actually produce, viz. nulls for any non-returnable columns.

This is easier to hit since we introduced included columns, but it's
possible to construct failing examples without that, as per the
added regression test.  Hence, back-patch to all supported branches.

Per bug #17350 from Louis Jachiet.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17350-b5bdcf476e5badbb@postgresql.org
2022-01-01 16:12:03 -05:00
David Rowley 411137a429 Flush Memoize cache when non-key parameters change, take 2
It's possible that a subplan below a Memoize node contains a parameter
from above the Memoize node.  If this parameter changes then cache entries
may become out-dated due to the new parameter value.

Previously Memoize was mistakenly not aware of this.  We fix this here by
flushing the cache whenever a parameter that's not part of the cache
key changes.

Bug: #17213
Reported by: Elvis Pranskevichus
Author: David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17213-988ed34b225a2862@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 14, where Memoize was added
2021-11-24 23:29:14 +13:00
David Rowley dad20ad470 Revert "Flush Memoize cache when non-key parameters change"
This reverts commit 1050048a31.
2021-11-24 15:27:43 +13:00
David Rowley 1050048a31 Flush Memoize cache when non-key parameters change
It's possible that a subplan below a Memoize node contains a parameter
from above the Memoize node.  If this parameter changes then cache entries
may become out-dated due to the new parameter value.

Previously Memoize was mistakenly not aware of this.  We fix this here by
flushing the cache whenever a parameter that's not part of the cache
key changes.

Bug: #17213
Reported by: Elvis Pranskevichus
Author: David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17213-988ed34b225a2862@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 14, where Memoize was added
2021-11-24 14:56:18 +13:00
David Rowley e502150f7d Allow Memoize to operate in binary comparison mode
Memoize would always use the hash equality operator for the cache key
types to determine if the current set of parameters were the same as some
previously cached set.  Certain types such as floating points where -0.0
and +0.0 differ in their binary representation but are classed as equal by
the hash equality operator may cause problems as unless the join uses the
same operator it's possible that whichever join operator is being used
would be able to distinguish the two values.  In which case we may
accidentally return in the incorrect rows out of the cache.

To fix this here we add a binary mode to Memoize to allow it to the
current set of parameters to previously cached values by comparing
bit-by-bit rather than logically using the hash equality operator.  This
binary mode is always used for LATERAL joins and it's used for normal
joins when any of the join operators are not hashable.

Reported-by: Tom Lane
Author: David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3004308.1632952496@sss.pgh.pa.us
Backpatch-through: 14, where Memoize was added
2021-11-24 10:06:59 +13:00
Peter Eisentraut 6fe0eb963d Add Cardinality typedef
Similar to Cost and Selectivity, this is just a double, which can be
used in path and plan nodes to give some hint about the meaning of a
field.

Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/c091e5cd-45f8-69ee-6a9b-de86912cc7e7@enterprisedb.com
2021-09-15 18:56:13 +02:00
Peter Eisentraut 2226b4189b Change SeqScan node to contain Scan node
This makes the structure of all Scan-derived nodes the same,
independent of whether they have additional fields.

Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/c1097590-a6a4-486a-64b1-e1f9cc0533ce@enterprisedb.com
2021-08-08 18:46:34 +02:00
David Rowley 83f4fcc655 Change the name of the Result Cache node to Memoize
"Result Cache" was never a great name for this node, but nobody managed
to come up with another name that anyone liked enough.  That was until
David Johnston mentioned "Node Memoization", which Tom Lane revised to
just "Memoize".  People seem to like "Memoize", so let's do the rename.

Reviewed-by: Justin Pryzby
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20210708165145.GG1176@momjian.us
Backpatch-through: 14, where Result Cache was introduced
2021-07-14 12:43:58 +12:00
Tom Lane 79c50ca578 Update plannodes.h's comments about PlanRowMark.
The reference here to different physical column numbers in inherited
UPDATE/DELETE plans is obsolete as of 86dc90056; remove it.  Also
rework the text about inheritance cases to make it clearer.
2021-06-02 11:52:35 -04:00
Tom Lane def5b065ff Initial pgindent and pgperltidy run for v14.
Also "make reformat-dat-files".

The only change worthy of note is that pgindent messed up the formatting
of launcher.c's struct LogicalRepWorkerId, which led me to notice that
that struct wasn't used at all anymore, so I just took it out.
2021-05-12 13:14:10 -04:00
Tom Lane 049e1e2edb Fix mishandling of resjunk columns in ON CONFLICT ... UPDATE tlists.
It's unusual to have any resjunk columns in an ON CONFLICT ... UPDATE
list, but it can happen when MULTIEXPR_SUBLINK SubPlans are present.
If it happens, the ON CONFLICT UPDATE code path would end up storing
tuples that include the values of the extra resjunk columns.  That's
fairly harmless in the short run, but if new columns are added to
the table then the values would become accessible, possibly leading
to malfunctions if they don't match the datatypes of the new columns.

This had escaped notice through a confluence of missing sanity checks,
including

* There's no cross-check that a tuple presented to heap_insert or
heap_update matches the table rowtype.  While it's difficult to
check that fully at reasonable cost, we can easily add assertions
that there aren't too many columns.

* The output-column-assignment cases in execExprInterp.c lacked
any sanity checks on the output column numbers, which seems like
an oversight considering there are plenty of assertion checks on
input column numbers.  Add assertions there too.

* We failed to apply nodeModifyTable's ExecCheckPlanOutput() to
the ON CONFLICT UPDATE tlist.  That wouldn't have caught this
specific error, since that function is chartered to ignore resjunk
columns; but it sure seems like a bad omission now that we've seen
this bug.

In HEAD, the right way to fix this is to make the processing of
ON CONFLICT UPDATE tlists work the same as regular UPDATE tlists
now do, that is don't add "SET x = x" entries, and use
ExecBuildUpdateProjection to evaluate the tlist and combine it with
old values of the not-set columns.  This adds a little complication
to ExecBuildUpdateProjection, but allows removal of a comparable
amount of now-dead code from the planner.

In the back branches, the most expedient solution seems to be to
(a) use an output slot for the ON CONFLICT UPDATE projection that
actually matches the target table, and then (b) invent a variant of
ExecBuildProjectionInfo that can be told to not store values resulting
from resjunk columns, so it doesn't try to store into nonexistent
columns of the output slot.  (We can't simply ignore the resjunk columns
altogether; they have to be evaluated for MULTIEXPR_SUBLINK to work.)
This works back to v10.  In 9.6, projections work much differently and
we can't cheaply give them such an option.  The 9.6 version of this
patch works by inserting a JunkFilter when it's necessary to get rid
of resjunk columns.

In addition, v11 and up have the reverse problem when trying to
perform ON CONFLICT UPDATE on a partitioned table.  Through a
further oversight, adjust_partition_tlist() discarded resjunk columns
when re-ordering the ON CONFLICT UPDATE tlist to match a partition.
This accidentally prevented the storing-bogus-tuples problem, but
at the cost that MULTIEXPR_SUBLINK cases didn't work, typically
crashing if more than one row has to be updated.  Fix by preserving
resjunk columns in that routine.  (I failed to resist the temptation
to add more assertions there too, and to do some minor code
beautification.)

Per report from Andres Freund.  Back-patch to all supported branches.

Security: CVE-2021-32028
2021-05-10 11:02:29 -04:00
David Rowley 5ac9c43073 Cleanup partition pruning step generation
There was some code in gen_prune_steps_from_opexps that needlessly
checked a list was not empty when it clearly had to contain at least one
item. This prompted a further cleanup operation in partprune.c.

Additionally, the previous code could end up adding additional needless
INTERSECT steps. However, those do not appear to be able to cause any
misbehavior.

gen_prune_steps_from_opexps is now no longer in charge of generating
combine pruning steps. Instead, gen_partprune_steps_internal, which
already does some combine step creation has been given the sole
responsibility of generating all combine steps. This means that when
we recursively call gen_partprune_steps_internal, since it always now adds
a combine step when it produces multiple steps, we can just pay attention
to the final step returned.

In passing, do quite a bit of work on the comments to try to more clearly
explain the role of both gen_partprune_steps_internal and
gen_prune_steps_from_opexps. This is fairly complex code so some extra
effort to give any new readers an overview of how things work seems like
a good idea.

Author: Amit Langote
Reported-by: Andy Fan
Reviewed-by: Kyotaro Horiguchi, Andy Fan, Ryan Lambert, David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKU4AWqWoVii+bRTeBQmeVW+PznkdO8DfbwqNsu9Gj4ubt9A6w@mail.gmail.com
2021-04-08 22:35:48 +12:00
David Rowley 9eacee2e62 Add Result Cache executor node (take 2)
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
2021-04-02 14:10:56 +13:00
David Rowley 28b3e3905c Revert b6002a796
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
2021-04-01 13:33:23 +13:00
David Rowley b6002a796d Add Result Cache executor node
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
2021-04-01 12:32:22 +13:00
Tom Lane 86dc90056d Rework planning and execution of UPDATE and DELETE.
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
2021-03-31 11:52:37 -04:00
Etsuro Fujita 27e1f14563 Add support for asynchronous execution.
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
2021-03-31 18:45:00 +09:00
Amit Kapila 26acb54a13 Revert "Enable parallel SELECT for "INSERT INTO ... SELECT ..."."
To allow inserts in parallel-mode this feature has to ensure that all the
constraints, triggers, etc. are parallel-safe for the partition hierarchy
which is costly and we need to find a better way to do that. Additionally,
we could have used existing cached information in some cases like indexes,
domains, etc. to determine the parallel-safety.

List of commits reverted, in reverse chronological order:

ed62d3737c Doc: Update description for parallel insert reloption.
c8f78b6161 Add a new GUC and a reloption to enable inserts in parallel-mode.
c5be48f092 Improve FK trigger parallel-safety check added by 05c8482f7f.
e2cda3c20a Fix use of relcache TriggerDesc field introduced by commit 05c8482f7f.
e4e87a32cc Fix valgrind issue in commit 05c8482f7f.
05c8482f7f Enable parallel SELECT for "INSERT INTO ... SELECT ...".

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1lMiB9-0001c3-SY@gemulon.postgresql.org
2021-03-24 11:29:15 +05:30
Amit Kapila 05c8482f7f Enable parallel SELECT for "INSERT INTO ... SELECT ...".
Parallel SELECT can't be utilized for INSERT in the following cases:
- INSERT statement uses the ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE clause
- Target table has a parallel-unsafe: trigger, index expression or
  predicate, column default expression or check constraint
- Target table has a parallel-unsafe domain constraint on any column
- Target table is a partitioned table with a parallel-unsafe partition key
  expression or support function

The planner is updated to perform additional parallel-safety checks for
the cases listed above, for determining whether it is safe to run INSERT
in parallel-mode with an underlying parallel SELECT. The planner will
consider using parallel SELECT for "INSERT INTO ... SELECT ...", provided
nothing unsafe is found from the additional parallel-safety checks, or
from the existing parallel-safety checks for SELECT.

While checking parallel-safety, we need to check it for all the partitions
on the table which can be costly especially when we decide not to use a
parallel plan. So, in a separate patch, we will introduce a GUC and or a
reloption to enable/disable parallelism for Insert statements.

Prior to entering parallel-mode for the execution of INSERT with parallel
SELECT, a TransactionId is acquired and assigned to the current
transaction state. This is necessary to prevent the INSERT from attempting
to assign the TransactionId whilst in parallel-mode, which is not allowed.
This approach has a disadvantage in that if the underlying SELECT does not
return any rows, then the TransactionId is not used, however that
shouldn't happen in practice in many cases.

Author: Greg Nancarrow, Amit Langote, Amit Kapila
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote, Hou Zhijie, Takayuki Tsunakawa, Antonin Houska, Bharath Rupireddy, Dilip Kumar, Vignesh C, Zhihong Yu, Amit Kapila
Tested-by: Tang, Haiying
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJcOf-cXnB5cnMKqWEp2E2z7Mvcd04iLVmV=qpFJrR3AcrTS3g@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJcOf-fAdj=nDKMsRhQzndm-O13NY4dL6xGcEvdX5Xvbbi0V7g@mail.gmail.com
2021-03-10 07:38:58 +05:30
David Rowley bb437f995d Add TID Range Scans to support efficient scanning ranges of TIDs
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
2021-02-27 22:59:36 +13:00
Bruce Momjian ca3b37487b Update copyright for 2021
Backpatch-through: 9.5
2021-01-02 13:06:25 -05:00
Heikki Linnakangas 178f2d560d Include result relation info in direct modify ForeignScan nodes.
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
2020-10-14 10:58:38 +03:00
Heikki Linnakangas 1375422c78 Create ResultRelInfos later in InitPlan, index them by RT index.
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
2020-10-13 12:57:02 +03:00
Tom Lane 5cbfce562f Initial pgindent and pgperltidy run for v13.
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.
2020-05-14 13:06:50 -04:00
Alvaro Herrera 357889eb17
Support FETCH FIRST WITH TIES
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
2020-04-07 16:22:13 -04:00
Tomas Vondra d2d8a229bc Implement Incremental Sort
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
2020-04-06 21:35:10 +02:00
Jeff Davis 32bb4535a0 Fix commit c11cb17d.
I neglected to update copyfuncs/outfuncs/readfuncs.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/12491.1582833409%40sss.pgh.pa.us
2020-02-28 09:35:11 -08:00
Jeff Davis c11cb17dc5 Save calculated transitionSpace in Agg node.
This will be useful in the upcoming Hash Aggregation work to improve
estimates for hash table sizing.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/37091115219dd522fd9ed67333ee8ed1b7e09443.camel%40j-davis.com
2020-02-27 11:20:56 -08:00
Bruce Momjian 7559d8ebfa Update copyrights for 2020
Backpatch-through: update all files in master, backpatch legal files through 9.4
2020-01-01 12:21:45 -05:00
Tom Lane 6ef77cf46e Further adjust EXPLAIN's choices of table alias names.
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
2019-12-11 17:05:18 -05:00
Andres Freund 2abd7ae9b2 Fix representation of hash keys in Hash/HashJoin nodes.
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-
2019-08-02 00:02:46 -07:00
Tom Lane be76af171c Initial pgindent run for v12.
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
2019-05-22 12:55:34 -04:00
Tom Lane 6630ccad7a Restructure creation of run-time pruning steps.
Previously, gen_partprune_steps() always built executor pruning steps
using all suitable clauses, including those containing PARAM_EXEC
Params.  This meant that the pruning steps were only completely safe
for executor run-time (scan start) pruning.  To prune at executor
startup, we had to ignore the steps involving exec Params.  But this
doesn't really work in general, since there may be logic changes
needed as well --- for example, pruning according to the last operator's
btree strategy is the wrong thing if we're not applying that operator.
The rules embodied in gen_partprune_steps() and its minions are
sufficiently complicated that tracking their incremental effects in
other logic seems quite impractical.

Short of a complete redesign, the only safe fix seems to be to run
gen_partprune_steps() twice, once to create executor startup pruning
steps and then again for run-time pruning steps.  We can save a few
cycles however by noting during the first scan whether we rejected
any clauses because they involved exec Params --- if not, we don't
need to do the second scan.

In support of this, refactor the internal APIs in partprune.c to make
more use of passing information in the GeneratePruningStepsContext
struct, rather than as separate arguments.

This is, I hope, the last piece of our response to a bug report from
Alan Jackson.  Back-patch to v11 where this code came in.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/FAD28A83-AC73-489E-A058-2681FA31D648@tvsquared.com
2019-05-17 19:44:34 -04:00
Tom Lane 428b260f87 Speed up planning when partitions can be pruned at plan time.
Previously, the planner created RangeTblEntry and RelOptInfo structs
for every partition of a partitioned table, even though many of them
might later be deemed uninteresting thanks to partition pruning logic.
This incurred significant overhead when there are many partitions.
Arrange to postpone creation of these data structures until after
we've processed the query enough to identify restriction quals for
the partitioned table, and then apply partition pruning before not
after creation of each partition's data structures.  In this way
we need not open the partition relations at all for partitions that
the planner has no real interest in.

For queries that can be proven at plan time to access only a small
number of partitions, this patch improves the practical maximum
number of partitions from under 100 to perhaps a few thousand.

Amit Langote, reviewed at various times by Dilip Kumar, Jesper Pedersen,
Yoshikazu Imai, and David Rowley

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9d7c5112-cb99-6a47-d3be-cf1ee6862a1d@lab.ntt.co.jp
2019-03-30 18:58:55 -04:00
Peter Eisentraut 5e1963fb76 Collations with nondeterministic comparison
This adds a flag "deterministic" to collations.  If that is false,
such a collation disables various optimizations that assume that
strings are equal only if they are byte-wise equal.  That then allows
use cases such as case-insensitive or accent-insensitive comparisons
or handling of strings with different Unicode normal forms.

This functionality is only supported with the ICU provider.  At least
glibc doesn't appear to have any locales that work in a
nondeterministic way, so it's not worth supporting this for the libc
provider.

The term "deterministic comparison" in this context is from Unicode
Technical Standard #10
(https://unicode.org/reports/tr10/#Deterministic_Comparison).

This patch makes changes in three areas:

- CREATE COLLATION DDL changes and system catalog changes to support
  this new flag.

- Many executor nodes and auxiliary code are extended to track
  collations.  Previously, this code would just throw away collation
  information, because the eventually-called user-defined functions
  didn't use it since they only cared about equality, which didn't
  need collation information.

- String data type functions that do equality comparisons and hashing
  are changed to take the (non-)deterministic flag into account.  For
  comparison, this just means skipping various shortcuts and tie
  breakers that use byte-wise comparison.  For hashing, we first need
  to convert the input string to a canonical "sort key" using the ICU
  analogue of strxfrm().

Reviewed-by: Daniel Verite <daniel@manitou-mail.org>
Reviewed-by: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/1ccc668f-4cbc-0bef-af67-450b47cdfee7@2ndquadrant.com
2019-03-22 12:12:43 +01:00
Robert Haas 898e5e3290 Allow ATTACH PARTITION with only ShareUpdateExclusiveLock.
We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because
otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition
constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing
that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is
weakened.

To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate
problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process
of building a PartitionDesc.  If so, find_inheritance_children() might
see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old
partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have
been queued.  To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to
be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly
from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION
still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to
change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite
difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition
is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there.

Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return
the same answer.  The query planner will get confused if lookup up the
PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent
answer for the entire duration of query planning.  Likewise, query
execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a
different PartitionDesc at different times.  Invent a new
PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency.  This
ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor
sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it
does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same
view.  Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to
survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old
PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it.

For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to
have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will
just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at
plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance
expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some
point.  Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is
executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a
prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is
started.  We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a
separate patch.  There would still be a small window where a query
that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might
fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before
the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts
here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting
for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without
a full table lock.

Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up
between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing
the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in
that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes.
Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc
are stable between planning and execution.  So, add code so that if
new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the
indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within
the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly.  There
does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope
with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get
added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added
partitions.

This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in
a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc.  That
currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc
indexes between backends.  Each backend will ignore the concurrently
added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different
backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions.
If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in
parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same
set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to
share PartitionDescs across backends.  There is a draft patch to
serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch
was discussed, which may be a useful place to start.

Patch by me.  Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs,
Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro
Herrera for some review.

Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
2019-03-07 11:13:12 -05:00
Bruce Momjian 97c39498e5 Update copyright for 2019
Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.4
2019-01-02 12:44:25 -05:00
Tom Lane b5415e3c21 Support parameterized TidPaths.
Up to now we've not worried much about joins where the join key is a
relation's CTID column, reasoning that storing a table's CTIDs in some
other table would be pretty useless.  However, there are use-cases for
this sort of query involving self-joins, so that argument doesn't really
hold water.

This patch allows generating plans for joins on CTID that use a nestloop
with inner TidScan, similar to what we might do with an index on the join
column.  This is the most efficient way to join when the outer side of
the nestloop is expected to yield relatively few rows.

This change requires upgrading tidpath.c and the generated TidPaths
to work with RestrictInfos instead of bare qual clauses, but that's
long-postponed technical debt anyway.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17443.1545435266@sss.pgh.pa.us
2018-12-30 15:24:28 -05:00
Peter Eisentraut 52d8e899d0 Correct code comments for PartitionedRelPruneInfo struct
The comments above the PartitionedRelPruneInfo struct incorrectly
document how subplan_map and subpart_map are indexed.  This seems to
have snuck in on 4e23236403.

Author: David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>
2018-11-15 23:04:48 +01:00
Tom Lane 52ed730d51 Remove some unnecessary fields from Plan trees.
In the wake of commit f2343653f, we no longer need some fields that
were used before to control executor lock acquisitions:

* PlannedStmt.nonleafResultRelations can go away entirely.

* partitioned_rels can go away from Append, MergeAppend, and ModifyTable.
However, ModifyTable still needs to know the RT index of the partition
root table if any, which was formerly kept in the first entry of that
list.  Add a new field "rootRelation" to remember that.  rootRelation is
partly redundant with nominalRelation, in that if it's set it will have
the same value as nominalRelation.  However, the latter field has a
different purpose so it seems best to keep them distinct.

Amit Langote, reviewed by David Rowley and Jesper Pedersen,
and whacked around a bit more by me

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/468c85d9-540e-66a2-1dde-fec2b741e688@lab.ntt.co.jp
2018-10-07 14:33:17 -04:00
Tom Lane 9ddef36278 Centralize executor's opening/closing of Relations for rangetable entries.
Create an array estate->es_relations[] paralleling the es_range_table,
and store references to Relations (relcache entries) there, so that any
given RT entry is opened and closed just once per executor run.  Scan
nodes typically still call ExecOpenScanRelation, but ExecCloseScanRelation
is no more; relation closing is now done centrally in ExecEndPlan.

This is slightly more complex than one would expect because of the
interactions with relcache references held in ResultRelInfo nodes.
The general convention is now that ResultRelInfo->ri_RelationDesc does
not represent a separate relcache reference and so does not need to be
explicitly closed; but there is an exception for ResultRelInfos in the
es_trig_target_relations list, which are manufactured by
ExecGetTriggerResultRel and have to be cleaned up by
ExecCleanUpTriggerState.  (That much was true all along, but these
ResultRelInfos are now more different from others than they used to be.)

To allow the partition pruning logic to make use of es_relations[] rather
than having its own relcache references, adjust PartitionedRelPruneInfo
to store an RT index rather than a relation OID.

Amit Langote, reviewed by David Rowley and Jesper Pedersen,
some mods by me

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/468c85d9-540e-66a2-1dde-fec2b741e688@lab.ntt.co.jp
2018-10-04 14:03:42 -04:00
Tom Lane 1c2cb2744b Fix run-time partition pruning for appends with multiple source rels.
The previous coding here supposed that if run-time partitioning applied to
a particular Append/MergeAppend plan, then all child plans of that node
must be members of a single partitioning hierarchy.  This is totally wrong,
since an Append could be formed from a UNION ALL: we could have multiple
hierarchies sharing the same Append, or child plans that aren't part of any
hierarchy.

To fix, restructure the related plan-time and execution-time data
structures so that we can have a separate list or array for each
partitioning hierarchy.  Also track subplans that are not part of any
hierarchy, and make sure they don't get pruned.

Per reports from Phil Florent and others.  Back-patch to v11, since
the bug originated there.

David Rowley, with a lot of cosmetic adjustments by me; thanks also
to Amit Langote for review.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/HE1PR03MB17068BB27404C90B5B788BCABA7B0@HE1PR03MB1706.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com
2018-08-01 19:42:52 -04:00
Heikki Linnakangas 5220bb7533 Expand run-time partition pruning to work with MergeAppend
This expands the support for the run-time partition pruning which was added
for Append in 499be013de to also allow unneeded subnodes of a MergeAppend
to be removed.

Author: David Rowley
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKJS1f_F_V8D7Wu-HVdnH7zCUxhoGK8XhLLtd%3DCu85qDZzXrgg%40mail.gmail.com
2018-07-19 13:49:43 +03:00
Tom Lane 4e23236403 Improve commentary about run-time partition pruning data structures.
No code changes except for a couple of new Asserts.

David Rowley and Tom Lane

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f-6GODRNgEtdPxCnAPme2h2hTztB6LmtfdmcYAAOE0kQg@mail.gmail.com
2018-06-11 17:35:53 -04:00
Tom Lane 321f648a31 Assorted cosmetic cleanup of run-time-partition-pruning code.
Use "subplan" rather than "subnode" to refer to the child plans of
a partitioning Append; this seems a bit more specific and hence
clearer.  Improve assorted comments.  No non-cosmetic changes.

David Rowley and Tom Lane

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFj8pRBjrufA3ocDm8o4LPGNye9Y+pm1b9kCwode4X04CULG3g@mail.gmail.com
2018-06-10 18:24:34 -04:00
Tom Lane 939449de0e Relocate partition pruning structs to a saner place.
These struct definitions were originally dropped into primnodes.h,
which is a poor choice since that's mainly intended for primitive
expression node types; these are not in that category.  What they
are is auxiliary info in Plan trees, so move them to plannodes.h.

For consistency, also relocate some related code that was apparently
placed with the aid of a dartboard.

There's no interesting code changes in this commit, just reshuffling.

David Rowley and Tom Lane

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFj8pRBjrufA3ocDm8o4LPGNye9Y+pm1b9kCwode4X04CULG3g@mail.gmail.com
2018-06-10 16:30:14 -04:00
Simon Riggs 08ea7a2291 Revert MERGE patch
This reverts commits d204ef6377,
83454e3c2b and a few more commits thereafter
(complete list at the end) related to MERGE feature.

While the feature was fully functional, with sufficient test coverage and
necessary documentation, it was felt that some parts of the executor and
parse-analyzer can use a different design and it wasn't possible to do that in
the available time. So it was decided to revert the patch for PG11 and retry
again in the future.

Thanks again to all reviewers and bug reporters.

List of commits reverted, in reverse chronological order:

 f1464c5380 Improve parse representation for MERGE
 ddb4158579 MERGE syntax diagram correction
 530e69e59b Allow cpluspluscheck to pass by renaming variable
 01b88b4df5 MERGE minor errata
 3af7b2b0d4 MERGE fix variable warning in non-assert builds
 a5d86181ec MERGE INSERT allows only one VALUES clause
 4b2d44031f MERGE post-commit review
 4923550c20 Tab completion for MERGE
 aa3faa3c7a WITH support in MERGE
 83454e3c2b New files for MERGE
 d204ef6377 MERGE SQL Command following SQL:2016

Author: Pavan Deolasee
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier
2018-04-12 11:22:56 +01:00