BufFileSize() can't use off_t, because it's only 32 bits wide on
some systems. BufFile objects can have many 1GB segments so the
total size can exceed 2^31. The only known client of the function
is parallel CREATE INDEX, which was reported to fail when building
large indexes on Windows.
Though this is technically an ABI break on platforms with a 32 bit
off_t and we might normally avoid back-patching it, the function is
brand new and thus unlikely to have been discovered by extension
authors yet, and it's fairly thoroughly broken on those platforms
anyway, so just fix it.
Defect in 9da0cc35. Bug #15460. Back-patch to 11, where this
function landed.
Author: Thomas Munro
Reported-by: Paul van der Linden, Pavel Oskin
Reviewed-by: Peter Geoghegan
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15460-b6db80de822fa0ad%40postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAHDGBJP_GsESbTt4P3FZA8kMUKuYxjg57XHF7NRBoKnR%3DCAR-g%40mail.gmail.com
To make this work, tuplesort.c and logtape.c must also support
parallelism, so this patch adds that infrastructure and then applies
it to the particular case of parallel btree index builds. Testing
to date shows that this can often be 2-3x faster than a serial
index build.
The model for deciding how many workers to use is fairly primitive
at present, but it's better than not having the feature. We can
refine it as we get more experience.
Peter Geoghegan with some help from Rushabh Lathia. While Heikki
Linnakangas is not an author of this patch, he wrote other patches
without which this feature would not have been possible, and
therefore the release notes should possibly credit him as an author
of this feature. Reviewed by Claudio Freire, Heikki Linnakangas,
Thomas Munro, Tels, Amit Kapila, me.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAM3SWZQKM=Pzc=CAHzRixKjp2eO5Q0Jg1SoFQqeXFQ647JiwqQ@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAH2-Wz=AxWqDoVvGU7dq856S4r6sJAj6DBn7VMtigkB33N5eyg@mail.gmail.com
Commit 11e264517 removed BufFile's isTemp flag, thereby eliminating
the possibility of resurrecting BufFileCreate(). But it left that
function in place, as well as a bunch of comments describing how things
worked for the non-temp-file case. At best, that's now a source of
confusion. So remove the long-since-commented-out function and change
relevant comments.
I (tgl) wanted to rename BufFileCreateTemp() to BufFileCreate(), but
that seems not to be the consensus position, so leave it as-is.
In passing, fix commit f0828b2fc's failure to update BufFileSeek's
comment to match the change of its argument type from long to off_t.
(I think that might actually have been intentional at the time, but
now that 64-bit off_t is nearly universal, it looks anachronistic.)
Thomas Munro and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1eFVyl-0008J1-RO@gemulon.postgresql.org
Change pg_bsd_indent to follow upstream rules for placement of comments
to the right of code, and remove pgindent hack that caused comments
following #endif to not obey the general rule.
Commit e3860ffa4d wasn't actually using
the published version of pg_bsd_indent, but a hacked-up version that
tried to minimize the amount of movement of comments to the right of
code. The situation of interest is where such a comment has to be
moved to the right of its default placement at column 33 because there's
code there. BSD indent has always moved right in units of tab stops
in such cases --- but in the previous incarnation, indent was working
in 8-space tab stops, while now it knows we use 4-space tabs. So the
net result is that in about half the cases, such comments are placed
one tab stop left of before. This is better all around: it leaves
more room on the line for comment text, and it means that in such
cases the comment uniformly starts at the next 4-space tab stop after
the code, rather than sometimes one and sometimes two tabs after.
Also, ensure that comments following #endif are indented the same
as comments following other preprocessor commands such as #else.
That inconsistency turns out to have been self-inflicted damage
from a poorly-thought-through post-indent "fixup" in pgindent.
This patch is much less interesting than the first round of indent
changes, but also bulkier, so I thought it best to separate the effects.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1dAmxK-0006EE-1r@gemulon.postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/30527.1495162840@sss.pgh.pa.us
than dividing them into 1GB segments as has been our longtime practice. This
requires working support for large files in the operating system; at least for
the time being, it won't be the default.
Zdenek Kotala
for each temp file, rather than once per sort or hashjoin; this allows
spreading the data of a large sort or join across multiple tablespaces.
(I remain dubious that this will make any difference in practice, but certain
people insisted.) Arrange to cache the results of parsing the GUC variable
instead of recomputing from scratch on every demand, and push usage of the
cache down to the bottommost fd.c level.
tablespace(s) in which to store temp tables and temporary files. This is a
list to allow spreading the load across multiple tablespaces (a random list
element is chosen each time a temp object is to be created). Temp files are
not stored in per-database pgsql_tmp/ directories anymore, but per-tablespace
directories.
Jaime Casanova and Albert Cervera, with review by Bernd Helmle and Tom Lane.
Also performed an initial run through of upgrading our Copyright date to
extend to 2005 ... first run here was very simple ... change everything
where: grep 1996-2004 && the word 'Copyright' ... scanned through the
generated list with 'less' first, and after, to make sure that I only
picked up the right entries ...
(materialization into a tuple store) discussed on pgsql-hackers earlier.
I've updated the documentation and the regression tests.
Notes on the implementation:
- I needed to change the tuple store API slightly -- it assumes that it
won't be used to hold data across transaction boundaries, so the temp
files that it uses for on-disk storage are automatically reclaimed at
end-of-transaction. I added a flag to tuplestore_begin_heap() to control
this behavior. Is changing the tuple store API in this fashion OK?
- in order to store executor results in a tuple store, I added a new
CommandDest. This works well for the most part, with one exception: the
current DestFunction API doesn't provide enough information to allow the
Executor to store results into an arbitrary tuple store (where the
particular tuple store to use is chosen by the call site of
ExecutorRun). To workaround this, I've temporarily hacked up a solution
that works, but is not ideal: since the receiveTuple DestFunction is
passed the portal name, we can use that to lookup the Portal data
structure for the cursor and then use that to get at the tuple store the
Portal is using. This unnecessarily ties the Portal code with the
tupleReceiver code, but it works...
The proper fix for this is probably to change the DestFunction API --
Tom suggested passing the full QueryDesc to the receiveTuple function.
In that case, callers of ExecutorRun could "subclass" QueryDesc to add
any additional fields that their particular CommandDest needed to get
access to. This approach would work, but I'd like to think about it for
a little bit longer before deciding which route to go. In the mean time,
the code works fine, so I don't think a fix is urgent.
- (semi-related) I added a NO SCROLL keyword to DECLARE CURSOR, and
adjusted the behavior of SCROLL in accordance with the discussion on
-hackers.
- (unrelated) Cleaned up some SGML markup in sql.sgml, copy.sgml
Neil Conway
recycle storage within sort temp file on a block-by-block basis. This
reduces peak disk usage to essentially just the volume of data being
sorted, whereas it had been about 4x the data volume before.
BufFile so that it handles multi-segment temporary files transparently.
This allows sorts and hashes to work with data exceeding 2Gig (or whatever
the local limit on file size is). Change psort.c to use relative seeks
instead of absolute seeks for backwards scanning, so that it won't fail
when the data volume exceeds 2Gig.