| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|---|
| ... | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This only became a problem with 4c640f4f38, which didn't synchronize
the value agg_strict_input_check.nargs is set to, with the guard
condition for emitting the operation.
Besides such instructions being unnecessary overhead, currently the
LLVM JIT provider doesn't support them. It seems more sensible to
avoid generating such instruction than supporting them. Add assertions
to make it easier to debug a potential further occurance.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2a505161-2727-2473-7c46-591ed108ac52@email.cz
Backpatch: 11-, like 4c640f4f38.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I (Andres) broke this unintentionally in 69c3936a14, by checking
strictness for all input expressions computed for an aggregate, rather
than just the input for the aggregate transition function.
Reported-By: Ondřej Bouda
Bisected-By: Tom Lane
Diagnosed-By: Andrew Gierth
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2a505161-2727-2473-7c46-591ed108ac52@email.cz
Backpatch: 11-, like 69c3936a14
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
NULL keys in left joins were skipped when building batch files.
Repair, by making the keep_nulls argument to ExecHashGetHashValue()
depend on whether this is a left outer join, as we do in other
paths.
Bug #15475. Thinko in 1804284042e. Back-patch to 11.
Reported-by: Paul Schaap
Diagnosed-by: Andrew Gierth
Dicussion: https://postgr.es/m/15475-11a7a783fed72a36%40postgresql.org
|
| |
|
|
| |
Author: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
An array-type coercion appearing within a CASE that has a constant
(after const-folding) test expression was mangled by the planner, causing
all the elements of the resulting array to be equal to the coerced value
of the CASE's test expression. This is my oversight in commit c12d570fa:
that changed ArrayCoerceExpr to use a subexpression involving a
CaseTestExpr, and I didn't notice that eval_const_expressions needed an
adjustment to keep from folding such a CaseTestExpr to a constant when
it's inside a suitable CASE.
This is another in what's getting to be a depressingly long line of bugs
associated with misidentification of the referent of a CaseTestExpr.
We're overdue to redesign that mechanism; but any such fix is unlikely
to be back-patchable into v11. As a stopgap, fix eval_const_expressions
to do what it must here. Also add a bunch of comments pointing out the
restrictions and assumptions that are needed to make this work at all.
Also fix a related oversight: contain_context_dependent_node() was not
aware of the relationship of ArrayCoerceExpr to CaseTestExpr. That was
somewhat fail-soft, in that the outcome of a wrong answer would be to
prevent optimizations that could have been made, but let's fix it while
we're at it.
Per bug #15471 from Matt Williams. Back-patch to v11 where the faulty
logic came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15471-1117f49271989bad@postgresql.org
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
es_leaf_result_relations doesn't exist; perhaps this was an old name
for es_tuple_routing_result_relations, or maybe this comment has gone
unmaintained through multiple rounds of whacking the code around.
Related comment in execnodes.h was both obsolete and ungrammatical.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This allows the compiler / linker to mark affected pages as read-only.
There's a fair number of pre-requisite changes, to allow the const
properly be propagated. Most of consts were already required for
correctness anyway, just not represented on the type-level. Arguably
we could be more aggressive in using consts in related code, but..
This requires using a few of the types underlying typedefs that
removes pointers (e.g. const NameData *) as declaring the typedefed
type constant doesn't have the same meaning (it makes the variable
const, not what it points to).
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181015200754.7y7zfuzsoux2c4ya@alap3.anarazel.de
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
There's several reasons for this change:
1) It reduces the total size of TupleTableSlot / reduces alignment
padding, making the commonly accessed members fit into a single
cacheline (but we currently do not force proper alignment, so
that's not yet guaranteed to be helpful)
2) Combining the booleans into a flag allows to combine read/writes
from memory.
3) With the upcoming slot abstraction changes, it allows to have core
and extended flags, in a memory efficient way.
Author: Ashutosh Bapat and Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180220224318.gw4oe5jadhpmcdnm@alap3.anarazel.de
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
heaptuple.c was never a particular good fit for slot_getattr(),
slot_getsomeattrs() and slot_getmissingattrs(), but in upcoming
changes slots will be made more abstract (allowing slots that contain
different types of tuples), making it clearly the wrong place.
Note that slot_deform_tuple() remains in it's current place, as it
clearly deals with a HeapTuple. getmissingattrs() also remains, but
it's less clear that that's correct - but execTuples.c wouldn't be the
right place.
Author: Ashutosh Bapat.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180220224318.gw4oe5jadhpmcdnm@alap3.anarazel.de
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Per discussion, this behavior seems less astonishing than not doing so.
Peter Eisentraut and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180920234040.GC29981@momjian.us
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
If there are many ExecRowMark structs, we spent O(N^2) time in
ExecFindRowMark during executor startup. Once upon a time this was
not of great concern, but the addition of native partitioning has
squeezed out enough other costs that this can become the dominant
overhead in some use-cases for tables with many partitions.
To fix, simply replace that List data structure with an array.
This adds a little bit of cost to execCurrentOf(), but not much,
and anyway that code path is neither of large importance nor very
efficient now. If we ever decide it is a bottleneck, constructing a
hash table for lookup-by-tableoid would likely be the thing to do.
Per complaint from Amit Langote, though this is different from
his fix proposal.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/468c85d9-540e-66a2-1dde-fec2b741e688@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Commit 9a3cebeaa changed things so that parallel workers didn't obtain
any lock of their own on tables they access. That was clearly a bad
idea, but I'd mistakenly supposed that it was the intended end result
of the series of patches for simplifying the executor's lock management.
Undo that change in relation_open(), and adjust ExecOpenScanRelation()
so that it gets the correct lock if inside a parallel worker.
In passing, clean up some more obsolete comments about when locks
are acquired.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/468c85d9-540e-66a2-1dde-fec2b741e688@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We already have appropriate locks on every relation listed in the
query's rangetable before we reach the executor. Take the next step
in exploiting that knowledge by removing code that worries about
taking locks on non-leaf result relations in a partitioned table.
In particular, get rid of ExecLockNonLeafAppendTables and a stanza in
InitPlan that asserts we already have locks on certain such tables.
In passing, clean up some now-obsolete comments in InitPlan.
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
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Historically we forbade datatype-specific comparison functions from
returning INT_MIN, so that it would be safe to invert the sort order
just by negating the comparison result. However, this was never
really safe for comparison functions that directly return the result
of memcmp(), strcmp(), etc, as POSIX doesn't place any such restriction
on those library functions. Buildfarm results show that at least on
recent Linux on s390x, memcmp() actually does return INT_MIN sometimes,
causing sort failures.
The agreed-on answer is to remove this restriction and fix relevant
call sites to not make such an assumption; code such as "res = -res"
should be replaced by "INVERT_COMPARE_RESULT(res)". The same is needed
in a few places that just directly negated the result of memcmp or
strcmp.
To help find places having this problem, I've also added a compile option
to nbtcompare.c that causes some of the commonly used comparators to
return INT_MIN/INT_MAX instead of their usual -1/+1. It'd likely be
a good idea to have at least one buildfarm member running with
"-DSTRESS_SORT_INT_MIN". That's far from a complete test of course,
but it should help to prevent fresh introductions of such bugs.
This is a longstanding portability hazard, so back-patch to all supported
branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180928185215.ffoq2xrq5d3pafna@alap3.anarazel.de
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Instead of doing a lot of list_nth() accesses to es_range_table,
create a flattened pointer array during executor startup and index
into that to get at individual RangeTblEntrys.
This eliminates one source of O(N^2) behavior with lots of partitions.
(I'm not exactly convinced that it's the most important source, but
it's an easy one to fix.)
Amit Langote and David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/468c85d9-540e-66a2-1dde-fec2b741e688@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Instead of locking tables during executor startup, just Assert that
suitable locks were obtained already during the parse/plan pipeline
(or re-obtained by the plan cache). This must be so, else we have a
hazard that concurrent DDL has invalidated the plan.
This is pretty inefficient as well as undercommented, but it's all going
to go away shortly, so I didn't try hard. This commit is just another
attempt to use the buildfarm to see if we've missed anything in the plan
to simplify the executor's table management.
Note that the change needed here in relation_open() exposes that
parallel workers now really are accessing tables without holding any
lock of their own, whereas they were not doing that before this commit.
This does not give me a warm fuzzy feeling about that aspect of parallel
query; it does not seem like a good design, and we now know that it's
had exactly no actual testing. I think that we should modify parallel
query so that that change can be reverted.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/468c85d9-540e-66a2-1dde-fec2b741e688@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I (Andres) was more than a bit hasty in committing 33001fd7a7072d48327
after last minute changes, leading to a number of problems (jit output
was only shown for JIT in parallel workers, and just EXPLAIN without
ANALYZE didn't work). Lukas luckily found these issues quickly.
Instead of combining instrumentation in in standard_ExecutorEnd(), do
so on demand in the new ExplainPrintJITSummary().
Also update a documentation example of the JIT output, changed in
52050ad8ebec8d831.
Author: Lukas Fittl, with minor changes by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAP53PkxmgJht69pabxBXJBM+0oc6kf3KHMborLP7H2ouJ0CCtQ@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 11, where JIT compilation was introduced
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Instead of recomputing the required lock levels in all these places,
just use what commit fdba460a2 made the parser store in the RTE fields.
This already simplifies the code measurably in these places, and
follow-on changes will remove a bunch of no-longer-needed infrastructure.
In a few cases, this change causes us to acquire a higher lock level
than we did before. This is OK primarily because said higher lock level
should've been acquired already at query parse time; thus, we're saving
a useless extra trip through the shared lock manager to acquire a lesser
lock alongside the original lock. The only known exception to this is
that re-execution of a previously planned SELECT FOR UPDATE/SHARE query,
for a table that uses ROW_MARK_REFERENCE or ROW_MARK_COPY methods, might
have gotten only AccessShareLock before. Now it will get RowShareLock
like the first execution did, which seems fine.
While there's more to do, push it in this state anyway, to let the
buildfarm help verify that nothing bad happened.
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
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
It's inefficient to use a single slot for mapping between tuple
descriptors for multiple tuples, as previously done when using
ConvertPartitionTupleSlot(), as that means the slot's tuple descriptors
change for every tuple.
Previously we also, via ConvertPartitionTupleSlot(), built new tuples
after the mapping even in cases where we, immediately afterwards,
access individual columns again.
Refactor the code so one slot, on demand, is used for each
partition. That avoids having to change the descriptor (and allows to
use the more efficient "fixed" tuple slots). Then use slot->slot
mapping, to avoid unnecessarily forming a tuple.
As the naming between the tuple and slot mapping functions wasn't
consistent, rename them to execute_attr_map_{tuple,slot}. It's likely
that we'll also rename convert_tuples_by_* to denote that these
functions "only" build a map, but that's left for later.
Author: Amit Khandekar and Amit Langote, editorialized by me
Reviewed-By: Amit Langote, Amit Khandekar, Andres Freund
Discussion:
https://postgr.es/m/CAJ3gD9fR0wRNeAE8VqffNTyONS_UfFPRpqxhnD9Q42vZB+Jvpg@mail.gmail.com
https://postgr.es/m/e4f9d743-cd4b-efb0-7574-da21d86a7f36%40lab.ntt.co.jp
Backpatch: -
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Add RangeTblEntry.rellockmode, which records the appropriate lock mode for
each RTE_RELATION rangetable entry (either AccessShareLock, RowShareLock,
or RowExclusiveLock depending on the RTE's role in the query).
This patch creates the field and makes all creators of RTE nodes fill it
in reasonably, but for the moment nothing much is done with it. The plan
is to replace assorted post-parser logic that re-determines the right
lockmode to use with simple uses of rte->rellockmode. For now, just add
Asserts in each of those places that the rellockmode matches what they are
computing today. (In some cases the match isn't perfect, so the Asserts
are weaker than you might expect; but this seems OK, as per discussion.)
This passes check-world for me, but it seems worth pushing in this state
to see if the buildfarm finds any problems in cases I failed to test.
catversion bump due to change of stored rules.
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
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
TupleDescGetSlot() was kept around for backward compatibility for
user-written SRFs. With the TupleTableSlot abstraction work, that code
will need to be version specific anyway, so there's no point in
keeping the function around any longer.
Author: Ashutosh Bapat
Reviewed-By: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180220224318.gw4oe5jadhpmcdnm@alap3.anarazel.de
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Upcoming changes introduce further types of tuple table slots, in
preparation of making table storage pluggable. New storage methods
will have different representation of tuples, therefore the slot
accessor should refer explicitly to heap tuples.
Instead of just renaming the functions, split it into one function
that accepts heap tuples not residing in buffers, and one accepting
ones in buffers. Previously one function was used for both, but that
was a bit awkward already, and splitting will allow us to represent
slot types for tuples in buffers and normal memory separately.
This is split out from the patch introducing abstract slots, as this
largely consists out of mechanical changes.
Author: Ashutosh Bapat
Reviewed-By: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180220224318.gw4oe5jadhpmcdnm@alap3.anarazel.de
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
That section is never in sync with the actual routines available and
their functionality.
Author: Ashutosh Bapat
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180220224318.gw4oe5jadhpmcdnm@alap3.anarazel.de
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
The documented shortcoming was actually fixed in 4c728f3829
so the comment is not true anymore.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Previously, when using parallel query, EXPLAIN (ANALYZE)'s JIT
compilation timings did not include the overhead from doing so on the
workers. Fix that.
We do so by simply aggregating the cost of doing JIT compilation on
workers and the leader together. Arguably that's not quite accurate,
because the total time spend doing so is spent in parallel - but it's
hard to do much better. For additional detail, when VERBOSE is
specified, the stats for workers are displayed separately.
Author: Amit Khandekar and Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJ3gD9eLrz51RK_gTkod+71iDcjpB_N8eC6vU2AW-VicsAERpQ@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 11-
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
In a case where we have multiple relation-scan nodes in a cursor plan,
such as a scan of an inheritance tree, it's possible to fetch from a
given scan node, then rewind the cursor and fetch some row from an
earlier scan node. In such a case, execCurrent.c mistakenly thought
that the later scan node was still active, because ExecReScan hadn't
done anything to make it look not-active. We'd get some sort of
failure in the case of a SeqScan node, because the node's scan tuple
slot would be pointing at a HeapTuple whose t_self gets reset to
invalid by heapam.c. But it seems possible that for other relation
scan node types we'd actually return a valid tuple TID to the caller,
resulting in updating or deleting a tuple that shouldn't have been
considered current. To fix, forcibly clear the ScanTupleSlot in
ExecScanReScan.
Another issue here, which seems only latent at the moment but could
easily become a live bug in future, is that rewinding a cursor does
not necessarily lead to *immediately* applying ExecReScan to every
scan-level node in the plan tree. Upper-level nodes will think that
they can postpone that call if their child node is already marked
with chgParam flags. I don't see a way for that to happen today in
a plan tree that's simple enough for execCurrent.c's search_plan_tree
to understand, but that's one heck of a fragile assumption. So, add
some logic in search_plan_tree to detect chgParam flags being set on
nodes that it descended to/through, and assume that that means we
should consider lower scan nodes to be logically reset even if their
ReScan call hasn't actually happened yet.
Per bug #15395 from Matvey Arye. This has been broken for a long time,
so back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/153764171023.14986.280404050547008575@wrigleys.postgresql.org
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The original coding for XMLTABLE thought it could represent a default
namespace by a T_String Value node with a null string pointer. That's
not okay, though; in particular outfuncs.c/readfuncs.c are not on board
with such a representation, meaning you'll get a null pointer crash
if you try to store a view or rule containing this construct.
To fix, change the parsetree representation so that we have a NULL
list element, instead of a bogus Value node.
This isn't really a functional limitation since default XML namespaces
aren't yet implemented in the executor; you'd just get "DEFAULT
namespace is not supported" anyway. But crashes are not nice, so
back-patch to v10 where this syntax was added. Ordinarily we'd consider
a parsetree representation change to be un-backpatchable; but since
existing releases would crash on the way to storing such constructs,
there can't be any existing views/rules to be incompatible with.
Per report from Andrey Lepikhov.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3690074f-abd2-56a9-144a-aa5545d7a291@postgrespro.ru
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The EvalPlanQual machinery assumes that any initplans (that is,
uncorrelated sub-selects) used during an EPQ recheck would have already
been evaluated during the main query; this is implicit in the fact that
execPlan pointers are not copied into the EPQ estate's es_param_exec_vals.
But it's possible for that assumption to fail, if the initplan is only
reached conditionally. For example, a sub-select inside a CASE expression
could be reached during a recheck when it had not been previously, if the
CASE test depends on a column that was just updated.
This bug is old, appearing to date back to my rewrite of EvalPlanQual in
commit 9f2ee8f28, but was not detected until Kyle Samson reported a case.
To fix, force all not-yet-evaluated initplans used within the EPQ plan
subtree to be evaluated at the start of the recheck, before entering the
EPQ environment. This could be inefficient, if such an initplan is
expensive and goes unused again during the recheck --- but that's piling
one layer of improbability atop another. It doesn't seem worth adding
more complexity to prevent that, at least not in the back branches.
It was convenient to use the new-in-v11 ExecEvalParamExecParams function
to implement this, but I didn't like either its name or the specifics of
its API, so revise that.
Back-patch all the way. Rather than rewrite the patch to avoid depending
on bms_next_member() in the oldest branches, I chose to back-patch that
function into 9.4 and 9.3. (This isn't the first time back-patches have
needed that, and it exhausted my patience.) I also chose to back-patch
some test cases added by commits 71404af2a and 342a1ffa2 into 9.4 and 9.3,
so that the 9.x versions of eval-plan-qual.spec are all the same.
Andrew Gierth diagnosed the problem and contributed the added test cases,
though the actual code changes are by me.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/A033A40A-B234-4324-BE37-272279F7B627@tripadvisor.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
There's no reason to expose the struct definition, so don't.
Author: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/d3fa24c1-bc65-7133-81df-6474387ccc4f@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This patch removes two sources of interference between nominally
independent functions when one SPI-using function calls another,
perhaps without knowing that it does so.
Chapman Flack pointed out that xml.c's query_to_xml_internal() expects
SPI_tuptable and SPI_processed to stay valid across datatype output
function calls; but it's possible that such a call could involve
re-entrant use of SPI. It seems likely that there are similar hazards
elsewhere, if not in the core code then in third-party SPI users.
Previously SPI_finish() reset SPI's API globals to zeroes/nulls, which
would typically make for a crash in such a situation. Restoring them
to the values they had at SPI_connect() seems like a considerably more
useful behavior, and it still meets the design goal of not leaving any
dangling pointers to tuple tables of the function being exited.
Also, cause SPI_connect() to reset these variables to zeroes/nulls after
saving them. This prevents interference in the opposite direction: it's
possible that a SPI-using function that's only ever been tested standalone
contains assumptions that these variables start out as zeroes. That was
the case as long as you were the outermost SPI user, but not so much for
an inner user. Now it's consistent.
Report and fix suggestion by Chapman Flack, actual patch by me.
Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9fa25bef-2e4f-1c32-22a4-3ad0723c4a17@anastigmatix.net
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
When executing a SubPlan in an expression, the EState's direction
field was left alone, resulting in an attempt to execute the subplan
backwards if it was encountered during a backwards scan of a cursor.
Also, though much less likely, it was possible to reach the execution
of an InitPlan while in backwards-scan state.
Repair by saving/restoring estate->es_direction and forcing forward
scan mode in the relevant places.
Backpatch all the way, since this has been broken since 8.3 (prior to
commit c7ff7663e, SubPlans had their own EStates rather than sharing
the parent plan's, so there was no confusion over scan direction).
Per bug #15336 reported by Vladimir Baranoff; analysis and patch by
me, review by Tom Lane.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/153449812167.1304.1741624125628126322@wrigleys.postgresql.org
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
In a multi-layer partitioning setup, if at plan time all the
sub-partitions are pruned but the intermediate one remains, the executor
later throws a spurious error that there's nothing to prune. That is
correct, but there's no reason to throw an error. Therefore, don't.
Reported-by: Andreas Seltenreich <seltenreich@gmx.de>
Author: David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87in4h98i0.fsf@ansel.ydns.eu
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
After commits a315b967cc and b805b63ac2, part of the comment atop
ExecShutdownNode is redundant. Adjust it.
Author: Amit Kapila
Backpatch-through: 10 where both the mentioned commits are present.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/86137f17-1dfb-42f9-7421-82fd786b04a1@anayrat.info
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Currently, we release the asynchronous resources as soon as it is evident
that no more rows will be needed e.g. when a Limit is filled. This can be
problematic especially for custom and foreign scans where we can scan
backward. Fix that by disallowing the shutting down of resources in such
cases.
Reported-by: Robert Haas
Analysed-by: Robert Haas and Amit Kapila
Author: Amit Kapila
Reviewed-by: Robert Haas
Backpatch-through: 9.6 where this code was introduced
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/86137f17-1dfb-42f9-7421-82fd786b04a1@anayrat.info
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Multiple calls to XMLTABLE in a query (e.g. laterally applying it to a
table with an xml column, an important use-case) were leaking large
amounts of memory into the per-query context, blowing up memory usage.
Repair by reorganizing memory context usage in nodeTableFuncscan; use
the usual per-tuple context for row-by-row evaluations instead of
perValueCxt, and use the explicitly created context -- renamed from
perValueCxt to perTableCxt -- for arguments and state for each
individual table-generation operation.
Backpatch to PG10 where this code was introduced.
Original report by IRC user begriffs; analysis and patch by me.
Reviewed by Tom Lane and Pavel Stehule.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/153394403528.10284.7530399040974170549@wrigleys.postgresql.org
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
These changes were put in at some stage of the development process, but
are unnecessary and should not have made it into the final patch. Mea
culpa.
Per gripe from Andreas Freund
Backpatch to REL_11_STABLE
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The buffer usage stats is accounted only for the execution phase of the
node. For Gather and Gather Merge nodes, such stats are accumulated at
the time of shutdown of workers which is done after execution of node due
to which we missed to account them for such nodes. Fix it by treating
nodes as running while we shut down them.
We can also miss accounting for a Limit node when Gather or Gather Merge
is beneath it, because it can finish the execution before shutting down
such nodes. So we allow a Limit node to shut down the resources before it
completes the execution.
In the passing fix the gather node code to allow workers to shut down as
soon as we find that all the tuples from the workers have been retrieved.
The original code use to do that, but is accidently removed by commit
01edb5c7fc.
Reported-by: Adrien Nayrat
Author: Amit Kapila and Robert Haas
Reviewed-by: Robert Haas and Andres Freund
Backpatch-through: 9.6 where this code was introduced
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/86137f17-1dfb-42f9-7421-82fd786b04a1@anayrat.info
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
In the leader backend, we don't track the buffer usage for ExecutorStart
phase whereas in worker backend we track it for ExecutorStart phase as
well. This leads to different value for buffer usage stats for the
parallel and non-parallel query. Change the code so that worker backend
also starts tracking buffer usage after ExecutorStart.
Author: Amit Kapila and Robert Haas
Reviewed-by: Robert Haas and Andres Freund
Backpatch-through: 9.6 where this code was introduced
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/86137f17-1dfb-42f9-7421-82fd786b04a1@anayrat.info
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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
|
| |
|
|
| |
Per buildfarm.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Some operations were being done in a longer-lived memory context,
causing intra-query leaks. It's not noticeable unless you're doing a
large COPY, but if you are, it eats enough memory to cause a problem.
Co-authored-by: Kohei KaiGai <kaigai@heterodb.com>
Co-authored-by: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Co-authored-by: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAOP8fzYtVFWZADq4c=KoTAqgDrHWfng+AnEPEZccyxqxPVbbWQ@mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
CopyFrom allows multi-inserts to be used for non-partitioned tables, but
this was disabled for partitioned tables. The reason for this appeared
to be that the tuple may not belong to the same partition as the
previous tuple did. Not allowing multi-inserts here greatly slowed down
imports into partitioned tables. These could take twice as long as a
copy to an equivalent non-partitioned table. It seems wise to do
something about this, so this change allows the multi-inserts by
flushing the so-far inserted tuples to the partition when the next tuple
does not belong to the same partition, or when the buffer fills. This
improves performance when the next tuple in the stream commonly belongs
to the same partition as the previous tuple.
In cases where the target partition changes on every tuple, using
multi-inserts slightly slows the performance. To get around this we
track the average size of the batches that have been inserted and
adaptively enable or disable multi-inserts based on the size of the
batch. Some testing was done and the regression only seems to exist
when the average size of the insert batch is close to 1, so let's just
enable multi-inserts when the average size is at least 1.3. More
performance testing might reveal a better number for, this, but since
the slowdown was only 1-2% it does not seem critical enough to spend too
much time calculating it. In any case it may depend on other factors
rather than just the size of the batch.
Allowing multi-inserts for partitions required a bit of work around the
per-tuple memory contexts as we must flush the tuples when the next
tuple does not belong the same partition. In which case there is no
good time to reset the per-tuple context, as we've already built the new
tuple by this time. In order to work around this we maintain two
per-tuple contexts and just switch between them every time the partition
changes and reset the old one. This does mean that the first of each
batch of tuples is not allocated in the same memory context as the
others, but that does not matter since we only reset the context once
the previous batch has been inserted.
Author: David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>
Reviewed-by: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Now that the bms_add_range boundary protections are gone, some
alternative ones are needed in a few places.
Author: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3437ccf8-a144-55ff-1e2f-fc16b437823b@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Instead of repeatedly fishing the data out of the relcache entry,
let's use the version that we cached in the PartitionDispatch. We
could alternatively rip out the PartitionDispatch fields altogether,
but it doesn't make much sense to have them and not use them; before
this patch, partdesc was set but altogether unused. Amit Langote and
I both thought using them was a litle better than removing them, so
this patch takes that approach.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmobFnxcaW-Co-XO8=yhJ5pJXoNkCj6Z7jm9Mwj9FGv-D7w@mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Due to inlining it previously was possible that an ExprContext's
shutdown callback pointed to a JITed function. As the JIT context
previously was shut down before the shutdown callbacks were called,
that could lead to segfaults. Fix the ordering.
Reported-By: Dmitry Dolgov
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+q6zcWO7CeAJtHBxgcHn_hj+PenM=tvG0RJ93X1uEJ86+76Ug@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 11-, where JIT compilation was added
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I was confused by what "intended to be parallel serially" meant, until
Robert Haas and David G. Johnston explained it. Rephrase the comment to
make it more clear, using David's suggested wording.
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1fec9022-41e8-e484-70ce-2179b08c2092%40iki.fi
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This comment was copy-pasted from nodeAppend.c to nodeMergeAppend.c, but
while committing 5220bb7533, I modified wrong copy of it.
Spotted by David Rowley
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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
|
