Add a new flag, consider_parallel, to each RelOptInfo, indicating
whether a plan for that relation could conceivably be run inside of
a parallel worker. Right now, we're pretty conservative: for example,
it might be possible to defer applying a parallel-restricted qual
in a worker, and later do it in the leader, but right now we just
don't try to parallelize access to that relation. That's probably
the right decision in most cases, anyway.
Using the new flag, generate parallel sequential scan plans for plain
baserels, meaning that we now have parallel sequential scan in
PostgreSQL. The logic here is pretty unsophisticated right now: the
costing model probably isn't right in detail, and we can't push joins
beneath Gather nodes, so the number of plans that can actually benefit
from this is pretty limited right now. Lots more work is needed.
Nevertheless, it seems time to enable this functionality so that all
this code can actually be tested easily by users and developers.
Note that, if you wish to test this functionality, it will be
necessary to set max_parallel_degree to a value greater than the
default of 0. Once a few more loose ends have been tidied up here, we
might want to consider changing the default value of this GUC, but
I'm leaving it alone for now.
Along the way, fix a bug in cost_gather: the previous coding thought
that a Gather node's transfer overhead should be costed on the basis of
the relation size rather than the number of tuples that actually need
to be passed off to the leader.
Patch by me, reviewed in earlier versions by Amit Kapila.
In addition, this path fills in a number of missing bits and pieces in
the parallel infrastructure. Paths and plans now have a parallel_aware
flag indicating whether whatever parallel-aware logic they have should
be engaged. It is believed that we will need this flag for a number of
path/plan types, not just sequential scans, which is why the flag is
generic rather than part of the SeqScan structures specifically.
Also, execParallel.c now gives parallel nodes a chance to initialize
their PlanState nodes from the DSM during parallel worker startup.
Amit Kapila, with a fair amount of adjustment by me. Review of previous
patch versions by Haribabu Kommi and others.
Rather than filling a temporary array and then copying values to the
output array, we can generate the required random permutation in-place
using the Fisher-Yates shuffle algorithm. This is shorter as well as
more efficient than before. It's pretty unlikely that anyone would
notice a speed improvement, but shorter code is better.
Nathan Wagner, edited a bit by me
The original Gather code failed to mark a Gather node as not able to
do projection, but it couldn't, even though it did call initialize its
projection info via ExecAssignProjectionInfo. There doesn't seem to
be any good reason for this node not to have projection capability,
so clean things up so that it does. Without this, plans using Gather
nodes might need to carry extra Result nodes to do projection.
In order for this to be safe, the code which hands true serializability
will need to taught that the SIRead locks taken by a parallel worker
pertain to the same transaction as those taken by the parallel leader.
Some further changes may be needed as well. Until the necessary
adaptations are made, don't generate parallel plans in serializable
mode, and if a previously-generated parallel plan is used after
serializable mode has been activated, run it serially.
This fixes a bug in commit 7aea8e4f2d.
This fixes a long-standing bug which was discovered while investigating
the interaction between the new join pushdown code and the EvalPlanQual
machinery: if a ForeignScan appears on the inner side of a paramaterized
nestloop, an EPQ recheck would re-return the original tuple even if
it no longer satisfied the pushed-down quals due to changed parameter
values.
This fix adds a new member to ForeignScan and ForeignScanState and a
new argument to make_foreignscan, and requires changes to FDWs which
push down quals to populate that new argument with a list of quals they
have chosen to push down. Therefore, I'm only back-patching to 9.5,
even though the bug is not new in 9.5.
Etsuro Fujita, reviewed by me and by Kyotaro Horiguchi.
During expand_security_quals, we take the security barrier quals on an
RTE and create a subquery which evaluates the quals. During this, we
have to replace any variables in the outer query which refer to the
original RTE with references to the columns from the subquery.
We need to also perform that replacement for any Vars in the
append_rel_list.
Only backpatching to 9.5 as we only go through this process in 9.4 for
auto-updatable security barrier views, which UNION ALL queries aren't.
Discovered by Haribabu Kommi
Patch by Dean Rasheed
Four related issues:
1) attnos/varnos/resnos for EXCLUDED were out of sync when a column
after one dropped in the underlying relation was referenced.
2) References to whole-row variables (i.e. EXCLUDED.*) lead to errors.
3) It was possible to reference system columns in the EXCLUDED pseudo
relations, even though they would not have valid contents.
4) References to EXCLUDED were rewritten by the RLS machinery, as
EXCLUDED was treated as if it were the underlying relation.
To fix the first two issues, generate the excluded targetlist with
dropped columns in mind and add an entry for whole row
variables. Instead of unconditionally adding a wholerow entry we could
pull up the expression if needed, but doing it unconditionally seems
simpler. The wholerow entry is only really needed for ruleutils/EXPLAIN
support anyway.
The remaining two issues are addressed by changing the EXCLUDED RTE to
have relkind = composite. That fits with EXCLUDED not actually being a
real relation, and allows to treat it differently in the relevant
places. scanRTEForColumn now skips looking up system columns when the
RTE has a composite relkind; fireRIRrules() already had a corresponding
check, thereby preventing RLS expansion on EXCLUDED.
Also add tests for these issues, and improve a few comments around
excluded handling in setrefs.c.
Reported-By: Peter Geoghegan, Geoff Winkless
Author: Andres Freund, Amit Langote, Peter Geoghegan
Discussion: CAEzk6fdzJ3xYQZGbcuYM2rBd2BuDkUksmK=mY9UYYDugg_GgZg@mail.gmail.com,
CAM3SWZS+CauzbiCEcg-GdE6K6ycHE_Bz6Ksszy8AoixcMHOmsA@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 9.5, where ON CONFLICT was introduced
A Gather executor node runs any number of copies of a plan in an equal
number of workers and merges all of the results into a single tuple
stream. It can also run the plan itself, if the workers are
unavailable or haven't started up yet. It is intended to work with
the Partial Seq Scan node which will be added in future commits.
It could also be used to implement parallel query of a different sort
by itself, without help from Partial Seq Scan, if the single_copy mode
is used. In that mode, a worker executes the plan, and the parallel
leader does not, merely collecting the worker's results. So, a Gather
node could be inserted into a plan to split the execution of that plan
across two processes. Nested Gather nodes aren't currently supported,
but we might want to add support for that in the future.
There's nothing in the planner to actually generate Gather nodes yet,
so it's not quite time to break out the champagne. But we're getting
close.
Amit Kapila. Some designs suggestions were provided by me, and I also
reviewed the patch. Single-copy mode, documentation, and other minor
changes also by me.
This code provides infrastructure for a parallel leader to start up
parallel workers to execute subtrees of the plan tree being executed
in the master. User-supplied parameters from ParamListInfo are passed
down, but PARAM_EXEC parameters are not. Various other constructs,
such as initplans, subplans, and CTEs, are also not currently shared.
Nevertheless, there's enough here to support a basic implementation of
parallel query, and we can lift some of the current restrictions as
needed.
Amit Kapila and Robert Haas
Previously, a function call appearing at the top level of WHERE had a
hard-wired selectivity estimate of 0.3333333, a kludge conveniently dated
in the source code itself to July 1992. The expectation at the time was
that somebody would soon implement estimator support functions analogous
to those for operators; but no such code has appeared, nor does it seem
likely to in the near future. We do have an alternative solution though,
at least for immutable functions on single relations: creating an
expression index on the function call will allow ANALYZE to gather stats
about the function's selectivity. But the code in clause_selectivity()
failed to make use of such data even if it exists.
Refactor so that that will happen. I chose to make it try this technique
for any clause type for which clause_selectivity() doesn't have a special
case, not just functions. To avoid adding unnecessary overhead in the
common case where we don't learn anything new, make selfuncs.c provide an
API that hooks directly to examine_variable() and then var_eq_const(),
rather than the previous coding which laboriously constructed an OpExpr
only so that it could be expensively deconstructed again.
I preserved the behavior that the default estimate for a function call
is 0.3333333. (For any other expression node type, it's 0.5, as before.)
I had originally thought to make the default be 0.5 across the board, but
changing a default estimate that's survived for twenty-three years seems
like something not to do without a lot more testing than I care to put
into it right now.
Per a complaint from Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais. Back-patch into 9.5,
but not further, at least for the moment.
Commit 924bcf4f16 introduced a framework
for parallel computation in PostgreSQL that makes most but not all
built-in functions safe to execute in parallel mode. In order to have
parallel query, we'll need to be able to determine whether that query
contains functions (either built-in or user-defined) that cannot be
safely executed in parallel mode. This requires those functions to be
labeled, so this patch introduces an infrastructure for that. Some
functions currently labeled as safe may need to be revised depending on
how pending issues related to heavyweight locking under paralllelism
are resolved.
Parallel plans can't be used except for the case where the query will
run to completion. If portal execution were suspended, the parallel
mode restrictions would need to remain in effect during that time, but
that might make other queries fail. Therefore, this patch introduces
a framework that enables consideration of parallel plans only when it
is known that the plan will be run to completion. This probably needs
some refinement; for example, at bind time, we do not know whether a
query run via the extended protocol will be execution to completion or
run with a limited fetch count. Having the client indicate its
intentions at bind time would constitute a wire protocol break. Some
contexts in which parallel mode would be safe are not adjusted by this
patch; the default is not to try parallel plans except from call sites
that have been updated to say that such plans are OK.
This commit doesn't introduce any parallel paths or plans; it just
provides a way to determine whether they could potentially be used.
I'm committing it on the theory that the remaining parallel sequential
scan patches will also get committed to this release, hopefully in the
not-too-distant future.
Robert Haas and Amit Kapila. Reviewed (in earlier versions) by Noah
Misch.
The "typo" alleged in commit 1e460d4bd was actually a comment that was
correct when written, but I missed updating it in commit b5282aa89.
Use a slightly less specific (and hopefully more future-proof) description
of what is collected. Back-patch to 9.2 where that commit appeared, and
revert the comment to its then-entirely-correct state before that.
One of the changes I made in commit 8703059c6b turns out not to have
been such a good idea: we still need the exception in join_is_legal() that
allows a join if both inputs already overlap the RHS of the special join
we're checking. Otherwise we can miss valid plans, and might indeed fail
to find a plan at all, as in recent report from Andreas Seltenreich.
That code was added way back in commit c17117649b, but I failed to
include a regression test case then; my bad. Put it back with a better
explanation, and a test this time. The logic does end up a bit different
than before though: I now believe it's appropriate to make this check
first, thereby allowing such a case whether or not we'd consider the
previous SJ(s) to commute with this one. (Presumably, we already decided
they did; but it was confusing to have this consideration in the middle
of the code that was handling the other case.)
Back-patch to all active branches, like the previous patch.
Until now we computed these Param ID sets at the end of subquery_planner,
but that approach depends on subquery_planner returning a concrete Plan
tree. We would like to switch over to returning one or more Paths for a
subquery, and in that representation the necessary details aren't fully
fleshed out (not to mention that we don't really want to do this work for
Paths that end up getting discarded). Hence, refactor so that we can
compute the param ID sets at the end of planning, just before
set_plan_references is run.
The main change necessary to make this work is that we need to capture
the set of outer-level Param IDs available to the current query level
before exiting subquery_planner, since the outer levels' plan_params lists
are transient. (That's not going to pose a problem for returning Paths,
since all the work involved in producing that data is part of expression
preprocessing, which will continue to happen before Paths are produced.)
On the plus side, this change gets rid of several existing kluges.
Eventually I'd like to get rid of SS_finalize_plan altogether in favor of
doing this work during set_plan_references, but that will require some
complex rejiggering because SS_finalize_plan needs to visit subplans and
initplans before the main plan. So leave that idea for another day.
Commit 85e5e222b1 turns out not to have taken
care of all cases of the partially-evaluatable-PlaceHolderVar problem found
by Andreas Seltenreich's fuzz testing. I had set it up to check for risky
PHVs only in the event that we were making a star-schema-based exception to
the param_source_rels join ordering heuristic. However, it turns out that
the problem can occur even in joins that satisfy the param_source_rels
heuristic, in which case allow_star_schema_join() isn't consulted.
Refactor so that we check for risky PHVs whenever the proposed join has
any remaining parameterization.
Back-patch to 9.2, like the previous patch (except for the regression test
case, which only works back to 9.3 because it uses LATERAL).
Note that this discovery implies that problems of this sort could've
occurred in 9.2 and up even before the star-schema patch; though I've not
tried to prove that experimentally.
A new test case from Andreas Seltenreich showed that we were still a bit
confused about removing PlaceHolderVars during join removal. Specifically,
remove_rel_from_query would remove a PHV that was used only underneath
the removable join, even if the place where it's used was the join partner
relation and not the join clause being deleted. This would lead to a
"too late to create a new PlaceHolderInfo" error later on. We can defend
against that by checking ph_eval_at to see if the PHV could possibly be
getting used at some partner rel.
Also improve some nearby LATERAL-related logic. I decided that the check
on ph_lateral needed to take precedence over the check on ph_needed, in
case there's a lateral reference underneath the join being considered.
(That may be impossible, but I'm not convinced of it, and it's easy enough
to defend against the case.) Also, I realized that remove_rel_from_query's
logic for updating LateralJoinInfos is dead code, because we don't build
those at all until after join removal.
Back-patch to 9.3. Previous versions didn't have the LATERAL issues, of
course, and they also didn't attempt to remove PlaceHolderInfos during join
removal. (I'm starting to wonder if changing that was really such a great
idea.)
Commit 9e7e29c75a introduced an Assert that
join removal didn't reduce the eval_at set of any PlaceHolderVar to empty.
At first glance it looks like join_is_removable ensures that's true --- but
actually, the loop in join_is_removable skips PlaceHolderVars that are not
referenced above the join due to be removed. So, if we don't want any
empty eval_at sets, the right thing to do is to delete any now-unreferenced
PlaceHolderVars from the data structure entirely.
Per fuzz testing by Andreas Seltenreich. Back-patch to 9.3 where the
aforesaid Assert was added.
Formerly, this function would always return "true" for an appendrel child
relation, because it would think that the appendrel parent was a potential
join target for the child. In principle that should only lead to some
inefficiency in planning, but fuzz testing by Andreas Seltenreich disclosed
that it could lead to "could not find pathkey item to sort" planner errors
in odd corner cases. Specifically, we would think that all columns of a
child table's multicolumn index were interesting pathkeys, causing us to
generate a MergeAppend path that sorts by all the columns. However, if any
of those columns weren't actually used above the level of the appendrel,
they would not get added to that rel's targetlist, which would result in
being unable to resolve the MergeAppend's sort keys against its targetlist
during createplan.c.
Backpatch to 9.3. In older versions, columns of an appendrel get added
to its targetlist even if they're not mentioned above the scan level,
so that the failure doesn't occur. It might be worth back-patching this
fix to older versions anyway, but I'll refrain for the moment.
Further testing revealed that commit f69b4b9495 was still a few
bricks shy of a load: minor tweaking of the previous test cases resulted
in the same wrong-outer-join-order problem coming back. After study
I concluded that my previous changes in make_outerjoininfo() were just
accidentally masking the problem, and should be reverted in favor of
forcing syntactic join order whenever an upper outer join's predicate
doesn't mention a lower outer join's LHS. This still allows the
chained-outer-joins style that is the normally optimizable case.
I also tightened things up some more in join_is_legal(). It seems to me
on review that what's really happening in the exception case where we
ignore a mismatched special join is that we're allowing the proposed join
to associate into the RHS of the outer join we're comparing it to. As
such, we should *always* insist that the proposed join be a left join,
which eliminates a bunch of rather dubious argumentation. The case where
we weren't enforcing that was the one that was already known buggy anyway
(it had a violatable Assert before the aforesaid commit) so it hardly
deserves a lot of deference.
Back-patch to all active branches, like the previous patch. The added
regression test case failed in all branches back to 9.1, and I think it's
only an unrelated change in costing calculations that kept 9.0 from
choosing a broken plan.
Per the discussion in optimizer/README, it's unsafe to reassociate anything
into or out of the RHS of a SEMI or ANTI join. An example from Piotr
Stefaniak showed that join_is_legal() wasn't sufficiently enforcing this
rule, so lock it down a little harder.
I couldn't find a reasonably simple example of the optimizer trying to
do this, so no new regression test. (Piotr's example involved the random
search in GEQO accidentally trying an invalid case and triggering a sanity
check way downstream in clause selectivity estimation, which did not seem
like a sequence of events that would be useful to memorialize in a
regression test as-is.)
Back-patch to all active branches.
In commit b514a7460d, I changed the planner
so that it would allow nestloop paths to remain partially parameterized,
ie the inner relation might need parameters from both the current outer
relation and some upper-level outer relation. That's fine so long as we're
talking about distinct parameters; but the patch also allowed creation of
nestloop paths for cases where the inner relation's parameter was a
PlaceHolderVar whose eval_at set included the current outer relation and
some upper-level one. That does *not* work.
In principle we could allow such a PlaceHolderVar to be evaluated at the
lower join node using values passed down from the upper relation along with
values from the join's own outer relation. However, nodeNestloop.c only
supports simple Vars not arbitrary expressions as nestloop parameters.
createplan.c is also a few bricks shy of being able to handle such cases;
it misplaces the PlaceHolderVar parameters in the plan tree, which is why
the visible symptoms of this bug are "plan should not reference subplan's
variable" and "failed to assign all NestLoopParams to plan nodes" planner
errors.
Adding the necessary complexity to make this work doesn't seem like it
would be repaid in significantly better plans, because in cases where such
a PHV exists, there is probably a corresponding join order constraint that
would allow a good plan to be found without using the star-schema exception.
Furthermore, adding complexity to nodeNestloop.c would create a run-time
penalty even for plans where this whole consideration is irrelevant.
So let's just reject such paths instead.
Per fuzz testing by Andreas Seltenreich; the added regression test is based
on his example query. Back-patch to 9.2, like the previous patch.
An outer join clause that didn't actually reference the RHS (perhaps only
after constant-folding) could confuse the join order enforcement logic,
leading to wrong query results. Also, nested occurrences of such things
could trigger an Assertion that on reflection seems incorrect.
Per fuzz testing by Andreas Seltenreich. The practical use of such cases
seems thin enough that it's not too surprising we've not heard field
reports about it.
This has been broken for a long time, so back-patch to all active branches.
Per complaint from Peter Holzer. It's useful to cover this special case,
since for a boolean variable "foo", earlier parts of the planner will have
reduced variants like "foo = true" to just "foo", and thus we may fail
to recognize the applicability of a partial index with predicate
"foo IS NOT NULL".
Back-patch to 9.5, but not further; given the lack of previous complaints
this doesn't seem like behavior to change in stable branches.
In many cases, we can implement a semijoin as a plain innerjoin by first
passing the righthand-side relation through a unique-ification step.
However, one of the cases where this does NOT work is where the RHS has
a LATERAL reference to the LHS; that makes the RHS dependent on the LHS
so that unique-ification is meaningless. joinpath.c understood this,
and so would not generate any join paths of this kind ... but join_is_legal
neglected to check for the case, so it would think that we could do it.
The upshot would be a "could not devise a query plan for the given query"
failure once we had failed to generate any join paths at all for the bogus
join pair.
Back-patch to 9.3 where LATERAL was added.
Although I think on all modern machines floating division by zero
results in Infinity not SIGFPE, we still don't want infinities
running around in the planner's costing estimates; too much risk
of that leading to insane behavior.
grouping_planner() failed to consider the possibility that final_rel
might be known dummy and hence have zero rowcount. (I wonder if it
would be better to set a rows estimate of 1 for dummy relations?
But at least in the back branches, changing this convention seems
like a bad idea, so I'll leave that for another day.)
Make certain that get_variable_numdistinct() produces a nonzero result.
The case that can be shown to be broken is with stadistinct < 0.0 and
small ntuples; we did not prevent the result from rounding to zero.
For good luck I applied clamp_row_est() to all the nonconstant return
values.
In ExecChooseHashTableSize(), Assert that we compute positive nbuckets
and nbatch. I know of no reason to think this isn't the case, but it
seems like a good safety check.
Per reports from Piotr Stefaniak. Back-patch to all active branches.
join_clause_is_movable_into() is approximate, in the sense that it might
sometimes return "false" when actually it would be valid to push the given
join clause down to the specified level. This is okay ... but there was
an Assert in get_joinrel_parampathinfo() that's only safe if the answers
are always exact. Comment out the Assert, and add a bunch of commentary
to clarify what's going on.
Per fuzz testing by Andreas Seltenreich. The added regression test is
a pretty silly query, but it's based on his crasher example.
Back-patch to 9.2 where the faulty logic was introduced.
I missed a restriction that commit f4abd0241d
should have enforced: we can't pull up an empty-FROM subquery if it's under
an outer join, because then we'd need to wrap its output columns in
PlaceHolderVars. As the code currently stands, the PHVs end up with empty
relid sets, which doesn't work (and is correctly caught by an Assert).
It's possible that this could be fixed by assigning the PHVs the relid
sets of the parent FromExpr/JoinExpr, but getting that to work is more
complication than I care to add right now; indeed it's likely that
we'll never bother, since pulling up empty-FROM subqueries is a rather
marginal optimization anyway.
Per report from Andreas Seltenreich. Back-patch to 9.5 where the faulty
code was added.
The planner generally expects that the estimated rowcount of any relation
is at least one row, *unless* it has been proven empty by constraint
exclusion or similar mechanisms, which is marked by installing a dummy path
as the rel's cheapest path (cf. IS_DUMMY_REL). When I split up
allpaths.c's processing of base rels into separate set_base_rel_sizes and
set_base_rel_pathlists steps, the intention was that dummy rels would get
marked as such during the "set size" step; this is what justifies an Assert
in indxpath.c's get_loop_count that other relations should either be dummy
or have positive rowcount. Unfortunately I didn't get that quite right
for append relations: if all the child rels have been proven empty then
set_append_rel_size would come up with a rowcount of zero, which is
correct, but it didn't then do set_dummy_rel_pathlist. (We would have
ended up with the right state after set_append_rel_pathlist, but that's
too late, if we generate indexpaths for some other rel first.)
In addition to fixing the actual bug, I installed an Assert enforcing this
convention in set_rel_size; that then allows simplification of a couple
of now-redundant tests for zero rowcount in set_append_rel_size.
Also, to cover the possibility that third-party FDWs have been careless
about not returning a zero rowcount estimate, apply clamp_row_est to
whatever an FDW comes up with as the rows estimate.
Per report from Andreas Seltenreich. Back-patch to 9.2. Earlier branches
did not have the separation between set_base_rel_sizes and
set_base_rel_pathlists steps, so there was no intermediate state where an
appendrel would have had inconsistent rowcount and pathlist. It's possible
that adding the Assert to set_rel_size would be a good idea in older
branches too; but since they're not under development any more, it's likely
not worth the trouble.
ON CONFLICT unique index inference had a thinko that could affect cases
where the user-supplied inference clause required that an attribute
match a particular (user specified) collation and/or opclass.
infer_collation_opclass_match() has to check for opclass and/or
collation matches and that the attribute is in the list of attributes or
expressions known to be in the definition of the index under
consideration. The bug was that these two conditions weren't necessarily
evaluated for the same index attribute.
Author: Peter Geoghegan
Discussion: CAM3SWZR4uug=WvmGk7UgsqHn2MkEzy9YU-+8jKGO4JPhesyeWg@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 9.5, where ON CONFLICT was introduced
Previously we disallowed pushing down quals to WHERE in the presence of
grouping sets. That's overly restrictive.
We now instead copy quals to WHERE if applicable, leaving the
one in HAVING in place. That's because, at that stage of the planning
process, it's nontrivial to determine if it's safe to remove the one in
HAVING.
Author: Andrew Gierth
Discussion: 874mkt3l59.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Backpatch: 9.5, where grouping sets were introduced. This isn't exactly
a bugfix, but it seems better to keep the branches in sync at this point.
Previously GROUPING() was not recognized as a aggregate expression,
erroneously allowing the planner to move it from HAVING to WHERE.
Author: Jeevan Chalke
Reviewed-By: Andrew Gierth
Discussion: CAM2+6=WG9omG5rFOMAYBweJxmpTaapvVp5pCeMrE6BfpCwr4Og@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 9.5, where grouping sets were introduced
The previous coding frequently failed to fail because for one it's
unusual to have rollup clauses with one column, and for another
sometimes the wrong mapping didn't cause obvious problems.
Author: Jeevan Chalke
Reviewed-By: Andrew Gierth
Discussion: CAM2+6=W=9=hQOipH0HAPbkun3Z3TFWij_EiHue0_6UX=oR=1kw@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 9.5, where grouping sets were introduced
The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method
API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without
specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can
implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable
thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will
pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural
language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level
support object needed is a single handler function identified by having
a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog
altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature.
Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments
(the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at
ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright
unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples.
Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable
within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more
honestly with methods that can't support that requirement.
Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix
assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as
failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering).
Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too.
Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API
in production.
UPDATE ... WHERE CURRENT OF would not work in conjunction with
RLS. Arrange to allow the CURRENT OF expression to be pushed down.
Issue noted by Peter Geoghegan. Patch by Dean Rasheed. Back patch
to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
The TABLESAMPLE and row security patches each overlooked this function,
though their errors of omission were opposite: RLS failed to zero out the
securityQuals field, leading to wasteful copying of useless expression
trees in finished plans, while TABLESAMPLE neglected to add a comment
saying that it intentionally *isn't* deleting the tablesample subtree.
There probably should be a similar comment about ctename, too.
Back-patch as appropriate.
Allow CustomPath to have a list of paths, CustomPlan a list of plans,
and CustomPlanState a list of planstates known to the core system, so
that custom path/plan providers can more reasonably use this
infrastructure for nodes with multiple children.
KaiGai Kohei, per a design suggestion from Tom Lane, with some
further kibitzing by me.
Commit c03ad5602f introduced a planner
performance regression for UPDATE/DELETE on large inheritance sets.
It required copying the append_rel_list (which is of size proportional to
the number of inherited tables) once for each inherited table, thus
resulting in O(N^2) time and memory consumption. While it's difficult to
avoid that in general, the extra work only has to be done for
append_rel_list entries that actually reference subquery RTEs, which
inheritance-set entries will not. So we can buy back essentially all of
the loss in cases without subqueries in FROM; and even for those, the added
work is mainly proportional to the number of UNION ALL subqueries.
Back-patch to 9.2, like the previous commit.
Tom Lane and Dean Rasheed, per a complaint from Thomas Munro.
add_path_precheck was doing exact comparisons of path costs, but it really
needs to do them fuzzily to be sure it won't reject paths that could
survive add_path's comparisons. (This can only matter if the initial cost
estimate is very close to the final one, but that turns out to often be
true.)
Also, it should ignore startup cost for this purpose if and only if
compare_path_costs_fuzzily would do so. The previous coding always ignored
startup cost for parameterized paths, which is wrong as of commit
3f59be836c555fa6; it could result in improper early rejection of paths that
we care about for SEMI/ANTI joins. It also always considered startup cost
for unparameterized paths, which is just as wrong though the only effect is
to waste planner cycles on paths that can't survive. Instead, it should
consider startup cost only when directed to by the consider_startup/
consider_param_startup relation flags.
Likewise, compare_path_costs_fuzzily should have symmetrical behavior
for parameterized and unparameterized paths. In this case, the best
answer seems to be that after establishing that total costs are fuzzily
equal, we should compare startup costs whether or not the consider_xxx
flags are on. That is what it's always done for unparameterized paths,
so let's make the behavior for parameterized paths match.
These issues were noted while developing the SEMI/ANTI join costing fix
of commit 3f59be836c, but we chose not to back-patch these fixes,
because they can cause changes in the planner's choices among
nearly-same-cost plans. (There is in fact one minor change in plan choice
within the core regression tests.) Destabilizing plan choices in back
branches without very clear improvements is frowned on, so we'll just fix
this in HEAD.
Robert Haas
Tom Lane
Stephen Frost
Andres Freund
Heikki Linnakangas
Joe Conway
Magnus Hagander