aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/backend/optimizer/plan/subselect.c
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAge
* Remove the RTE_GROUP RTE if we drop the groupClauseRichard Guo2024-10-25
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | For an EXISTS subquery, the only thing that matters is whether it returns zero or more than zero rows. Therefore, we remove certain SQL features that won't affect that, among them the GROUP BY clauses. After we drop the groupClause, we'd better remove the RTE_GROUP RTE and clear the hasGroupRTE flag, as they depend on the groupClause. Failing to do so could result in a bogus RTE_GROUP entry in the parent query, leading to an assertion failure on the hasGroupRTE flag. Reported-by: David Rowley Author: Richard Guo Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvp2_yht8uPLyWO-kVGWZhYvx5zjGfSrg4fBQ9fsC13V0g@mail.gmail.com
* Fix some grammatical errors in some commentsDavid Rowley2024-06-05
| | | | | | | Introduced by 9f1337639. Author: James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAaqYe9ZQ_1+QiF_Nv7b37opicBu+35ZQK1CetQ54r5UdrF1eg@mail.gmail.com
* Re-allow planner to use Merge Append to efficiently implement UNION.Robert Haas2024-05-21
| | | | | | | | | | | This reverts commit 7204f35919b7e021e8d1bc9f2d76fd6bfcdd2070, thus restoring 66c0185a3 (Allow planner to use Merge Append to efficiently implement UNION) as well as the follow-on commits d5d2205c8, 3b1a7eb28, 7487044d6. Per further discussion on pgsql-release, we wish to ship beta1 with this feature, and patch the bug that was found just before wrap, rather than shipping beta1 with the feature reverted.
* Revert commit 66c0185a3 and follow-on patches.Tom Lane2024-05-20
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This reverts 66c0185a3 (Allow planner to use Merge Append to efficiently implement UNION) as well as the follow-on commits d5d2205c8, 3b1a7eb28, 7487044d6. In addition to those, 07746a8ef had to be removed then re-applied in a different place, because 66c0185a3 moved the relevant code. The reason for this last-minute thrashing is that depesz found a case in which the patched code creates a completely wrong plan that silently gives incorrect query results. It's unclear what the cause is or how many cases are affected, but with beta1 wrap staring us in the face, there's no time for closer investigation. After we figure that out, we can decide whether to un-revert this for beta2 or hold it for v18. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/Zktzf926vslR35Fv@depesz.com (also some private discussion among pgsql-release)
* Fix assert failure when planning setop subqueries with CTEsDavid Rowley2024-04-02
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 66c0185a3 adjusted the UNION planner to request that union child queries produce Paths correctly ordered to implement the UNION by way of MergeAppend followed by Unique. The code there made a bad assumption that if the root->parent_root->parse had setOperations set that the query must be the child subquery of a set operation. That's not true when it comes to planning a non-inlined CTE which is parented by a set operation. This causes issues as the CTE's targetlist has no requirement to match up to the SetOperationStmt's groupClauses Fix this by adding a new parameter to both subquery_planner() and grouping_planner() to explicitly pass the SetOperationStmt only when planning set operation child subqueries. Thank you to Tom Lane for helping to rationalize the decision on the best function signature for subquery_planner(). Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/242fc7c6-a8aa-2daf-ac4c-0a231e2619c1@gmail.com
* Propagate pathkeys from CTEs up to the outer query.Tom Lane2024-03-26
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | If we know the sort order of a CTE's output, and it is relevant to the outer query, label the CTE's outer-query access path using those pathkeys. This may enable optimizations such as avoiding a sort in the outer query. The code for hoisting pathkeys into the outer query already exists for regular RTE_SUBQUERY subqueries, but it wasn't getting used for CTEs, possibly out of concern for maintaining an optimization fence between the CTE and the outer query. However, on the same arguments used for commit f7816aec2, there seems no harm in letting the outer query know what the inner query decided to do. In support of this, we now remember the best Path as well as Plan for each subquery for the rest of the planner run. There may be future applications for having that at hand, and it surely costs little to build one more List. Richard Guo (minor mods by me) Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMbWs49xYd3f8CrE8-WW3--dV1zH_sDSDn-vs2DzHj81Wcnsew@mail.gmail.com
* Improve EXPLAIN's display of SubPlan nodes and output parameters.Tom Lane2024-03-19
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Historically we've printed SubPlan expression nodes as "(SubPlan N)", which is pretty uninformative. Trying to reproduce the original SQL for the subquery is still as impractical as before, and would be mighty verbose as well. However, we can still do better than that. Displaying the "testexpr" when present, and adding a keyword to indicate the SubLinkType, goes a long way toward showing what's really going on. In addition, this patch gets rid of EXPLAIN's use of "$n" to represent subplan and initplan output Params. Instead we now print "(SubPlan N).colX" or "(InitPlan N).colX" to represent the X'th output column of that subplan. This eliminates confusion with the use of "$n" to represent PARAM_EXTERN Params, and it's useful for the first part of this change because it eliminates needing some other indication of which subplan is referenced by a SubPlan that has a testexpr. In passing, this adds simple regression test coverage of the ROWCOMPARE_SUBLINK code paths, which were entirely unburdened by testing before. Tom Lane and Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Aleksander Alekseev. Thanks to Chantal Keller for raising the question of whether this area couldn't be improved. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2838538.1705692747@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Add RETURNING support to MERGE.Dean Rasheed2024-03-17
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This allows a RETURNING clause to be appended to a MERGE query, to return values based on each row inserted, updated, or deleted. As with plain INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE commands, the returned values are based on the new contents of the target table for INSERT and UPDATE actions, and on its old contents for DELETE actions. Values from the source relation may also be returned. As with INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE, the output of MERGE ... RETURNING may be used as the source relation for other operations such as WITH queries and COPY commands. Additionally, a special function merge_action() is provided, which returns 'INSERT', 'UPDATE', or 'DELETE', depending on the action executed for each row. The merge_action() function can be used anywhere in the RETURNING list, including in arbitrary expressions and subqueries, but it is an error to use it anywhere outside of a MERGE query's RETURNING list. Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Isaac Morland, Vik Fearing, Alvaro Herrera, Gurjeet Singh, Jian He, Jeff Davis, Merlin Moncure, Peter Eisentraut, and Wolfgang Walther. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCWePEGQR5LBn-vD6SfeLZafzEm2Qy_L_Oky2=qw2w3Pzg@mail.gmail.com
* Pull up ANY-SUBLINK with the necessary lateral support.Alexander Korotkov2024-02-15
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | For ANY-SUBLINK, we adopted a two-stage pull-up approach to handle different types of scenarios. In the first stage, the sublink is pulled up as a subquery. Because of this, when writing this code, we did not have the ability to perform lateral joins, and therefore, we were unable to pull up Var with varlevelsup=1. Now that we have the ability to use lateral joins, we can eliminate this limitation. Author: Andy Fan <zhihui.fan1213@gmail.com> Author: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> Reviewed-by: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> Reviewed-by: Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Alena Rybakina <lena.ribackina@yandex.ru> Reviewed-by: Andrey Lepikhov <a.lepikhov@postgrespro.ru>
* Update copyright for 2024Bruce Momjian2024-01-03
| | | | | | | | Reported-by: Michael Paquier Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/ZZKTDPxBBMt3C0J9@paquier.xyz Backpatch-through: 12
* Allow plan nodes with initPlans to be considered parallel-safe.Tom Lane2023-07-14
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | If the plan itself is parallel-safe, and the initPlans are too, there's no reason anymore to prevent the plan from being marked parallel-safe. That restriction (dating to commit ab77a5a45) was really a special case of the fact that we couldn't transmit subplans to parallel workers at all. We fixed that in commit 5e6d8d2bb and follow-ons, but this case never got addressed. We still forbid attaching initPlans to a Gather node that's inserted pursuant to debug_parallel_query = regress. That's because, when we hide the Gather from EXPLAIN output, we'd hide the initPlans too, causing cosmetic regression diffs. It seems inadvisable to kluge EXPLAIN to the extent required to make the output look the same, so just don't do it in that case. Along the way, this also takes care of some sloppiness about updating path costs to match when we move initplans from one place to another during createplan.c and setrefs.c. Since all the planning decisions are already made by that point, this is just cosmetic; but it seems good to keep EXPLAIN output consistent with where the initplans are. The diff in query_planner() might be worth remarking on. I found that one because after fixing things to allow parallel-safe initplans, one partition_prune test case changed plans (as shown in the patch) --- but only when debug_parallel_query was active. The reason proved to be that we only bothered to mark Result nodes as potentially parallel-safe when debug_parallel_query is on. This neglects the fact that parallel-safety may be of interest for a sub-query even though the Result itself doesn't parallelize. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1129530.1681317832@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Account for optimized MinMax aggregates during SS_finalize_plan.Tom Lane2023-07-14
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | We are capable of optimizing MIN() and MAX() aggregates on indexed columns into subqueries that exploit the index, rather than the normal thing of scanning the whole table. When we do this, we replace the Aggref node(s) with Params referencing subquery outputs. Such Params really ought to be included in the per-plan-node extParam/allParam sets computed by SS_finalize_plan. However, we've never done so up to now because of an ancient implementation choice to perform that substitution during set_plan_references, which runs after SS_finalize_plan, so that SS_finalize_plan never sees these Params. This seems like clearly a bug, yet there have been no field reports of problems that could trace to it. This may be because the types of Plan nodes that could contain Aggrefs do not have any of the rescan optimizations that are controlled by extParam/allParam. Nonetheless it seems certain to bite us someday, so let's fix it in a self-contained patch that can be back-patched if we find a case in which there's a live bug pre-v17. The cleanest fix would be to perform a separate tree walk to do these substitutions before SS_finalize_plan runs. That seems unattractive, first because a whole-tree mutation pass is expensive, and second because we lack infrastructure for visiting expression subtrees in a Plan tree, so that we'd need a new function knowing as much as SS_finalize_plan knows about that. I also considered swapping the order of SS_finalize_plan and set_plan_references, but that fell foul of various assumptions that seem tricky to fix. So the approach adopted here is to teach SS_finalize_plan itself to check for such Aggrefs. I refactored things a bit in setrefs.c to avoid having three copies of the code that does that. Given the lack of any currently-known bug, no test case here. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2391880.1689025003@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Fix hash join when inner hashkey expressions contain Params.Tom Lane2023-06-20
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | If the inner-side expressions contain PARAM_EXEC Params, we must re-hash whenever the values of those Params change. The executor mechanism for that exists already, but we failed to invoke it because finalize_plan() neglected to search the Hash.hashkeys field for Params. This allowed a previous scan's hash table to be re-used when it should not be, leading to rows missing from the join's output. (I believe incorrectly-included join rows are impossible however, since checking the real hashclauses would reject false matches.) This bug is very ancient, dating probably to d24d75ff1 of 7.4. Sadly, this simple fix depends on the plan representational changes made by 2abd7ae9b, so it will only work back to v12. I thought about trying to make some kind of hack for v11, but I'm leery of putting code significantly different from what is used in the newer branches into a nearly-EOL branch. Seeing that the bug escaped detection for a full twenty years, problematic cases must be rare; so I don't feel too awful about leaving v11 as-is. Per bug #17985 from Zuming Jiang. Back-patch to v12. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17985-748b66607acd432e@postgresql.org
* Fix parallel-safety marking when moving initplans to another node.Tom Lane2023-04-12
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Our policy since commit ab77a5a45 has been that a plan node having any initplans is automatically not parallel-safe. (This could be relaxed, but not today.) clean_up_removed_plan_level neglected this, and could attach initplans to a parallel-safe child plan node without clearing the plan's parallel-safe flag. That could lead to "subplan was not initialized" errors at runtime, in case an initplan referenced another one and only the referencing one got transmitted to parallel workers. The fix in clean_up_removed_plan_level is trivial enough. materialize_finished_plan also moves initplans from one node to another, but it's okay because it already copies the source node's parallel_safe flag. The other place that does this kind of thing is standard_planner's hack to inject a top-level Gather when debug_parallel_query is active. But that's actually dead code given that we're correctly enforcing the "initplans aren't parallel safe" rule, so just replace it with an Assert that there are no initplans. Also improve some related comments. Normally we'd add a regression test case for this sort of bug. The mistake itself is already reached by existing tests, but there is accidentally no visible problem. The only known test case that creates an actual failure seems too indirect and fragile to justify keeping it as a regression test (not least because it fails to fail in v11, though the bug is clearly present there too). Per report from Justin Pryzby. Back-patch to all supported branches. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/ZDVt6MaNWkRDO1LQ@telsasoft.com
* Remove local optimizations of empty Bitmapsets into null pointers.Tom Lane2023-03-02
| | | | | | | | These are all dead code now that it's done centrally. Patch by me; thanks to Nathan Bossart and Richard Guo for review. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1159933.1677621588@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Remove bms_first_member().Tom Lane2023-03-02
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | This function has been semi-deprecated ever since we invented bms_next_member(). Its habit of scribbling on the input bitmapset isn't great, plus for sufficiently large bitmapsets it would take O(N^2) time to complete a loop. Now we have the additional problem that reducing the input to empty while leaving it still accessible would violate a planned invariant. So let's just get rid of it, after updating the few extant callers to use bms_next_member(). Patch by me; thanks to Nathan Bossart and Richard Guo for review. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1159933.1677621588@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Update copyright for 2023Bruce Momjian2023-01-02
| | | | Backpatch-through: 11
* Rework query relation permission checkingAlvaro Herrera2022-12-06
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Currently, information about the permissions to be checked on relations mentioned in a query is stored in their range table entries. So the executor must scan the entire range table looking for relations that need to have permissions checked. This can make the permission checking part of the executor initialization needlessly expensive when many inheritance children are present in the range range. While the permissions need not be checked on the individual child relations, the executor still must visit every range table entry to filter them out. This commit moves the permission checking information out of the range table entries into a new plan node called RTEPermissionInfo. Every top-level (inheritance "root") RTE_RELATION entry in the range table gets one and a list of those is maintained alongside the range table. This new list is initialized by the parser when initializing the range table. The rewriter can add more entries to it as rules/views are expanded. Finally, the planner combines the lists of the individual subqueries into one flat list that is passed to the executor for checking. To make it quick to find the RTEPermissionInfo entry belonging to a given relation, RangeTblEntry gets a new Index field 'perminfoindex' that stores the corresponding RTEPermissionInfo's index in the query's list of the latter. ExecutorCheckPerms_hook has gained another List * argument; the signature is now: typedef bool (*ExecutorCheckPerms_hook_type) (List *rangeTable, List *rtePermInfos, bool ereport_on_violation); The first argument is no longer used by any in-core uses of the hook, but we leave it in place because there may be other implementations that do. Implementations should likely scan the rtePermInfos list to determine which operations to allow or deny. Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqGjJDmUhDSfv-U2qhKJjt9ST7Xh9JXC_irsAQ1TAUsJYg@mail.gmail.com
* More -Wshadow=compatible-local warning fixesDavid Rowley2022-08-26
| | | | | | | | | | | | In a similar effort to f01592f91, here we're targetting fixing the warnings where we've deemed the shadowing variable to serve a close enough purpose to the shadowed variable just to reuse the shadowed version and not declare the shadowing variable at all. By my count, this takes the warning count from 106 down to 71. Author: Justin Pryzby Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220825020839.GT2342@telsasoft.com
* Remove inadequate assertion check in CTE inlining.Tom Lane2022-04-21
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | inline_cte() expected to find exactly as many references to the target CTE as its cterefcount indicates. While that should be accurate for the tree as emitted by the parser, there are some optimizations that occur upstream of here that could falsify it, notably removal of unused subquery output expressions. Trying to make the accounting 100% accurate seems expensive and doomed to future breakage. It's not really worth it, because all this code is protecting is downstream assumptions that every referenced CTE has a plan. Let's convert those assertions to regular test-and-elog just in case there's some actual problem, and then drop the failing assertion. Per report from Tomas Vondra (thanks also to Richard Guo for analysis). Back-patch to v12 where the faulty code came in. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/29196a1e-ed47-c7ca-9be2-b1c636816183@enterprisedb.com
* Fix assorted missing logic for GroupingFunc nodes.Tom Lane2022-03-21
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The planner needs to treat GroupingFunc like Aggref for many purposes, in particular with respect to processing of the argument expressions, which are not to be evaluated at runtime. A few places hadn't gotten that memo, notably including subselect.c's processing of outer-level aggregates. This resulted in assertion failures or wrong plans for cases in which a GROUPING() construct references an outer aggregation level. Also fix missing special cases for GroupingFunc in cost_qual_eval (resulting in wrong cost estimates for GROUPING(), although it's not clear that that would affect plan shapes in practice) and in ruleutils.c (resulting in excess parentheses in pretty-print mode). Per bug #17088 from Yaoguang Chen. Back-patch to all supported branches. Richard Guo, Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17088-e33882b387de7f5c@postgresql.org
* Teach hash_ok_operator() that record_eq is only sometimes hashable.Tom Lane2022-01-16
| | | | | | | | | | | The need for this was foreseen long ago, but when record_eq actually became hashable (in commit 01e658fa7), we missed updating this spot. Per bug #17363 from Elvis Pranskevichus. Back-patch to v14 where the faulty commit came in. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17363-f6d42fd0d726be02@postgresql.org
* Update copyright for 2022Bruce Momjian2022-01-07
| | | | Backpatch-through: 10
* Fix index-only scan plans, take 2.Tom Lane2022-01-03
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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
* Get rid of artificial restriction on hash table sizes on Windows.Tom Lane2021-07-25
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The point of introducing the hash_mem_multiplier GUC was to let users reproduce the old behavior of hash aggregation, i.e. that it could use more than work_mem at need. However, the implementation failed to get the job done on Win64, where work_mem is clamped to 2GB to protect various places that calculate memory sizes using "long int". As written, the same clamp was applied to hash_mem. This resulted in severe performance regressions for queries requiring a bit more than 2GB for hash aggregation, as they now spill to disk and there's no way to stop that. Getting rid of the work_mem restriction seems like a good idea, but it's a big job and could not conceivably be back-patched. However, there's only a fairly small number of places that are concerned with the hash_mem value, and it turns out to be possible to remove the restriction there without too much code churn or any ABI breaks. So, let's do that for now to fix the regression, and leave the larger task for another day. This patch does introduce a bit more infrastructure that should help with the larger task, namely pg_bitutils.h support for working with size_t values. Per gripe from Laurent Hasson. Back-patch to v13 where the behavior change came in. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/997817.1627074924@sss.pgh.pa.us Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/MN2PR15MB25601E80A9B6D1BA6F592B1985E39@MN2PR15MB2560.namprd15.prod.outlook.com
* Change the name of the Result Cache node to MemoizeDavid Rowley2021-07-14
| | | | | | | | | | | "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
* Add Result Cache executor node (take 2)David Rowley2021-04-02
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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
* Revert b6002a796David Rowley2021-04-01
| | | | | | | | | | | | | 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
* Add Result Cache executor nodeDavid Rowley2021-04-01
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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
* Rework planning and execution of UPDATE and DELETE.Tom Lane2021-03-31
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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
* Allow an alias to be attached to a JOIN ... USINGPeter Eisentraut2021-03-31
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This allows something like SELECT ... FROM t1 JOIN t2 USING (a, b, c) AS x where x has the columns a, b, c and unlike a regular alias it does not hide the range variables of the tables being joined t1 and t2. Per SQL:2016 feature F404 "Range variable for common column names". Reviewed-by: Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@2ndquadrant.com> Reviewed-by: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/454638cf-d563-ab76-a585-2564428062af@2ndquadrant.com
* Add TID Range Scans to support efficient scanning ranges of TIDsDavid Rowley2021-02-27
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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
* Fix pull_varnos' miscomputation of relids set for a PlaceHolderVar.Tom Lane2021-01-21
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Previously, pull_varnos() took the relids of a PlaceHolderVar as being equal to the relids in its contents, but that fails to account for the possibility that we have to postpone evaluation of the PHV due to outer joins. This could result in a malformed plan. The known cases end up triggering the "failed to assign all NestLoopParams to plan nodes" sanity check in createplan.c, but other symptoms may be possible. The right value to use is the join level we actually intend to evaluate the PHV at. We can get that from the ph_eval_at field of the associated PlaceHolderInfo. However, there are some places that call pull_varnos() before the PlaceHolderInfos have been created; in that case, fall back to the conservative assumption that the PHV will be evaluated at its syntactic level. (In principle this might result in missing some legal optimization, but I'm not aware of any cases where it's an issue in practice.) Things are also a bit ticklish for calls occurring during deconstruct_jointree(), but AFAICS the ph_eval_at fields should have reached their final values by the time we need them. The main problem in making this work is that pull_varnos() has no way to get at the PlaceHolderInfos. We can fix that easily, if a bit tediously, in HEAD by passing it the planner "root" pointer. In the back branches that'd cause an unacceptable API/ABI break for extensions, so leave the existing entry points alone and add new ones with the additional parameter. (If an old entry point is called and encounters a PHV, it'll fall back to using the syntactic level, again possibly missing some valid optimization.) Back-patch to v12. The computation is surely also wrong before that, but it appears that we cannot reach a bad plan thanks to join order restrictions imposed on the subquery that the PlaceHolderVar came from. The error only became reachable when commit 4be058fe9 allowed trivial subqueries to be collapsed out completely, eliminating their join order restrictions. Per report from Stephan Springl. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/171041.1610849523@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Update copyright for 2021Bruce Momjian2021-01-02
| | | | Backpatch-through: 9.5
* Move resolution of AlternativeSubPlan choices to the planner.Tom Lane2020-09-27
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | When commit bd3daddaf introduced AlternativeSubPlans, I had some ambitions towards allowing the choice of subplan to change during execution. That has not happened, or even been thought about, in the ensuing twelve years; so it seems like a failed experiment. So let's rip that out and resolve the choice of subplan at the end of planning (in setrefs.c) rather than during executor startup. This has a number of positive benefits: * Removal of a few hundred lines of executor code, since AlternativeSubPlans need no longer be supported there. * Removal of executor-startup overhead (particularly, initialization of subplans that won't be used). * Removal of incidental costs of having a larger plan tree, such as tree-scanning and copying costs in the plancache; not to mention setrefs.c's own costs of processing the discarded subplans. * EXPLAIN no longer has to print a weird (and undocumented) representation of an AlternativeSubPlan choice; it sees only the subplan actually used. This should mean less confusion for users. * Since setrefs.c knows which subexpression of a plan node it's working on at any instant, it's possible to adjust the estimated number of executions of the subplan based on that. For example, we should usually estimate more executions of a qual expression than a targetlist expression. The implementation used here is pretty simplistic, because we don't want to expend a lot of cycles on the issue; but it's better than ignoring the point entirely, as the executor had to. That last point might possibly result in shifting the choice between hashed and non-hashed EXISTS subplans in a few cases, but in general this patch isn't meant to change planner choices. Since we're doing the resolution so late, it's really impossible to change any plan choices outside the AlternativeSubPlan itself. Patch by me; thanks to David Rowley for review. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1992952.1592785225@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Be more careful about the shape of hashable subplan clauses.Tom Lane2020-08-14
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | nodeSubplan.c expects that the testexpr for a hashable ANY SubPlan has the form of one or more OpExprs whose LHS is an expression of the outer query's, while the RHS is an expression over Params representing output columns of the subquery. However, the planner only went as far as verifying that the clauses were all binary OpExprs. This works 99.99% of the time, because the clauses have the right shape when emitted by the parser --- but it's possible for function inlining to break that, as reported by PegoraroF10. To fix, teach the planner to check that the LHS and RHS contain the right things, or more accurately don't contain the wrong things. Given that this has been broken for years without anyone noticing, it seems sufficient to just give up hashing when it happens, rather than go to the trouble of commuting the clauses back again (which wouldn't necessarily work anyway). While poking at that, I also noticed that nodeSubplan.c had a baked-in assumption that the number of hash clauses is identical to the number of subquery output columns. Again, that's fine as far as parser output goes, but it's not hard to break it via function inlining. There seems little reason for that assumption though --- AFAICS, the only thing it's buying us is not having to store the number of hash clauses explicitly. Adding code to the planner to reject such cases would take more code than getting nodeSubplan.c to cope, so I fixed it that way. This has been broken for as long as we've had hashable SubPlans, so back-patch to all supported branches. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1549209182255-0.post@n3.nabble.com
* Add hash_mem_multiplier GUC.Peter Geoghegan2020-07-29
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Add a GUC that acts as a multiplier on work_mem. It gets applied when sizing executor node hash tables that were previously size constrained using work_mem alone. The new GUC can be used to preferentially give hash-based nodes more memory than the generic work_mem limit. It is intended to enable admin tuning of the executor's memory usage. Overall system throughput and system responsiveness can be improved by giving hash-based executor nodes more memory (especially over sort-based alternatives, which are often much less sensitive to being memory constrained). The default value for hash_mem_multiplier is 1.0, which is also the minimum valid value. This means that hash-based nodes continue to apply work_mem in the traditional way by default. hash_mem_multiplier is generally useful. However, it is being added now due to concerns about hash aggregate performance stability for users that upgrade to Postgres 13 (which added disk-based hash aggregation in commit 1f39bce0). While the old hash aggregate behavior risked out-of-memory errors, it is nevertheless likely that many users actually benefited. Hash agg's previous indifference to work_mem during query execution was not just faster; it also accidentally made aggregation resilient to grouping estimate problems (at least in cases where this didn't create destabilizing memory pressure). hash_mem_multiplier can provide a certain kind of continuity with the behavior of Postgres 12 hash aggregates in cases where the planner incorrectly estimates that all groups (plus related allocations) will fit in work_mem/hash_mem. This seems necessary because hash-based aggregation is usually much slower when only a small fraction of all groups can fit. Even when it isn't possible to totally avoid hash aggregates that spill, giving hash aggregation more memory will reliably improve performance (the same cannot be said for external sort operations, which appear to be almost unaffected by memory availability provided it's at least possible to get a single merge pass). The PostgreSQL 13 release notes should advise users that increasing hash_mem_multiplier can help with performance regressions associated with hash aggregation. That can be taken care of by a later commit. Author: Peter Geoghegan Reviewed-By: Álvaro Herrera, Jeff Davis Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200625203629.7m6yvut7eqblgmfo@alap3.anarazel.de Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-WzmD%2Bi1pG6rc1%2BCjc4V6EaFJ_qSuKCCHVnH%3DoruqD-zqow%40mail.gmail.com Backpatch: 13-, where disk-based hash aggregation was introduced.
* Implement Incremental SortTomas Vondra2020-04-06
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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
* Make parser rely more heavily on the ParseNamespaceItem data structure.Tom Lane2020-01-02
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | When I added the ParseNamespaceItem data structure (in commit 5ebaaa494), it wasn't very tightly integrated into the parser's APIs. In the wake of adding p_rtindex to that struct (commit b541e9acc), there is a good reason to make more use of it: by passing around ParseNamespaceItem pointers instead of bare RTE pointers, we can get rid of various messy methods for passing back or deducing the rangetable index of an RTE during parsing. Hence, refactor the addRangeTableEntryXXX functions to build and return a ParseNamespaceItem struct, not just the RTE proper; and replace addRTEtoQuery with addNSItemToQuery, which is passed a ParseNamespaceItem rather than building one internally. Also, add per-column data (a ParseNamespaceColumn array) to each ParseNamespaceItem. These arrays are built during addRangeTableEntryXXX, where we have column type data at hand so that it's nearly free to fill the data structure. Later, when we need to build Vars referencing RTEs, we can use the ParseNamespaceColumn info to avoid the rather expensive operations done in get_rte_attribute_type() or expandRTE(). get_rte_attribute_type() is indeed dead code now, so I've removed it. This makes for a useful improvement in parse analysis speed, around 20% in one moderately-complex test query. The ParseNamespaceColumn structs also include Var identity information (varno/varattno). That info isn't actually being used in this patch, except that p_varno == 0 is a handy test for a dropped column. A follow-on patch will make more use of it. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2461.1577764221@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Update copyrights for 2020Bruce Momjian2020-01-01
| | | | Backpatch-through: update all files in master, backpatch legal files through 9.4
* Represent Lists as expansible arrays, not chains of cons-cells.Tom Lane2019-07-15
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Originally, Postgres Lists were a more or less exact reimplementation of Lisp lists, which consist of chains of separately-allocated cons cells, each having a value and a next-cell link. We'd hacked that once before (commit d0b4399d8) to add a separate List header, but the data was still in cons cells. That makes some operations -- notably list_nth() -- O(N), and it's bulky because of the next-cell pointers and per-cell palloc overhead, and it's very cache-unfriendly if the cons cells end up scattered around rather than being adjacent. In this rewrite, we still have List headers, but the data is in a resizable array of values, with no next-cell links. Now we need at most two palloc's per List, and often only one, since we can allocate some values in the same palloc call as the List header. (Of course, extending an existing List may require repalloc's to enlarge the array. But this involves just O(log N) allocations not O(N).) Of course this is not without downsides. The key difficulty is that addition or deletion of a list entry may now cause other entries to move, which it did not before. For example, that breaks foreach() and sister macros, which historically used a pointer to the current cons-cell as loop state. We can repair those macros transparently by making their actual loop state be an integer list index; the exposed "ListCell *" pointer is no longer state carried across loop iterations, but is just a derived value. (In practice, modern compilers can optimize things back to having just one loop state value, at least for simple cases with inline loop bodies.) In principle, this is a semantics change for cases where the loop body inserts or deletes list entries ahead of the current loop index; but I found no such cases in the Postgres code. The change is not at all transparent for code that doesn't use foreach() but chases lists "by hand" using lnext(). The largest share of such code in the backend is in loops that were maintaining "prev" and "next" variables in addition to the current-cell pointer, in order to delete list cells efficiently using list_delete_cell(). However, we no longer need a previous-cell pointer to delete a list cell efficiently. Keeping a next-cell pointer doesn't work, as explained above, but we can improve matters by changing such code to use a regular foreach() loop and then using the new macro foreach_delete_current() to delete the current cell. (This macro knows how to update the associated foreach loop's state so that no cells will be missed in the traversal.) There remains a nontrivial risk of code assuming that a ListCell * pointer will remain good over an operation that could now move the list contents. To help catch such errors, list.c can be compiled with a new define symbol DEBUG_LIST_MEMORY_USAGE that forcibly moves list contents whenever that could possibly happen. This makes list operations significantly more expensive so it's not normally turned on (though it is on by default if USE_VALGRIND is on). There are two notable API differences from the previous code: * lnext() now requires the List's header pointer in addition to the current cell's address. * list_delete_cell() no longer requires a previous-cell argument. These changes are somewhat unfortunate, but on the other hand code using either function needs inspection to see if it is assuming anything it shouldn't, so it's not all bad. Programmers should be aware of these significant performance changes: * list_nth() and related functions are now O(1); so there's no major access-speed difference between a list and an array. * Inserting or deleting a list element now takes time proportional to the distance to the end of the list, due to moving the array elements. (However, it typically *doesn't* require palloc or pfree, so except in long lists it's probably still faster than before.) Notably, lcons() used to be about the same cost as lappend(), but that's no longer true if the list is long. Code that uses lcons() and list_delete_first() to maintain a stack might usefully be rewritten to push and pop at the end of the list rather than the beginning. * There are now list_insert_nth...() and list_delete_nth...() functions that add or remove a list cell identified by index. These have the data-movement penalty explained above, but there's no search penalty. * list_concat() and variants now copy the second list's data into storage belonging to the first list, so there is no longer any sharing of cells between the input lists. The second argument is now declared "const List *" to reflect that it isn't changed. This patch just does the minimum needed to get the new implementation in place and fix bugs exposed by the regression tests. As suggested by the foregoing, there's a fair amount of followup work remaining to do. Also, the ENABLE_LIST_COMPAT macros are finally removed in this commit. Code using those should have been gone a dozen years ago. Patch by me; thanks to David Rowley, Jesper Pedersen, and others for review. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/11587.1550975080@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Phase 2 pgindent run for v12.Tom Lane2019-05-22
| | | | | | | | | Switch to 2.1 version of pg_bsd_indent. This formats multiline function declarations "correctly", that is with additional lines of parameter declarations indented to match where the first line's left parenthesis is. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=0P3FeTXRcU5B2W3jv3PgRVZ-kGUXLGfd42FFhUROO3ug@mail.gmail.com
* Prevent inlining of multiply-referenced CTEs with outer recursive refs.Tom Lane2019-04-09
| | | | | | | | | | | This has to be prevented because inlining would result in multiple self-references, which we don't support (and in fact that's disallowed by the SQL spec, see statements about linearly vs. nonlinearly recursive queries). Bug fix for commit 608b167f9. Per report from Yaroslav Schekin (via Andrew Gierth) Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87wolmg60q.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
* Standardize some more loops that chase down parallel lists.Tom Lane2019-02-28
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | We have forboth() and forthree() macros that simplify iterating through several parallel lists, but not everyplace that could reasonably use those was doing so. Also invent forfour() and forfive() macros to do the same for four or five parallel lists, and use those where applicable. The immediate motivation for doing this is to reduce the number of ad-hoc lnext() calls, to reduce the footprint of a WIP patch. However, it seems like good cleanup and error-proofing anyway; the places that were combining forthree() with a manually iterated loop seem particularly illegible and bug-prone. There was some speculation about restructuring related parsetree representations to reduce the need for parallel list chasing of this sort. Perhaps that's a win, or perhaps not, but in any case it would be considerably more invasive than this patch; and it's not particularly related to my immediate goal of improving the List infrastructure. So I'll leave that question for another day. Patch by me; thanks to David Rowley for review. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/11587.1550975080@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Allow user control of CTE materialization, and change the default behavior.Tom Lane2019-02-16
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Historically we've always materialized the full output of a CTE query, treating WITH as an optimization fence (so that, for example, restrictions from the outer query cannot be pushed into it). This is appropriate when the CTE query is INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE, or is recursive; but when the CTE query is non-recursive and side-effect-free, there's no hazard of changing the query results by pushing restrictions down. Another argument for materialization is that it can avoid duplicate computation of an expensive WITH query --- but that only applies if the WITH query is called more than once in the outer query. Even then it could still be a net loss, if each call has restrictions that would allow just a small part of the WITH query to be computed. Hence, let's change the behavior for WITH queries that are non-recursive and side-effect-free. By default, we will inline them into the outer query (removing the optimization fence) if they are called just once. If they are called more than once, we will keep the old behavior by default, but the user can override this and force inlining by specifying NOT MATERIALIZED. Lastly, the user can force the old behavior by specifying MATERIALIZED; this would mainly be useful when the query had deliberately been employing WITH as an optimization fence to prevent a poor choice of plan. Andreas Karlsson, Andrew Gierth, David Fetter Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87sh48ffhb.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
* Refactor planner's header files.Tom Lane2019-01-29
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Create a new header optimizer/optimizer.h, which exposes just the planner functions that can be used "at arm's length", without need to access Paths or the other planner-internal data structures defined in nodes/relation.h. This is intended to provide the whole planner API seen by most of the rest of the system; although FDWs still need to use additional stuff, and more thought is also needed about just what selfuncs.c should rely on. The main point of doing this now is to limit the amount of new #include baggage that will be needed by "planner support functions", which I expect to introduce later, and which will be in relevant datatype modules rather than anywhere near the planner. This commit just moves relevant declarations into optimizer.h from other header files (a couple of which go away because everything got moved), and adjusts #include lists to match. There's further cleanup that could be done if we want to decide that some stuff being exposed by optimizer.h doesn't belong in the planner at all, but I'll leave that for another day. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/11460.1548706639@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Make some small planner API cleanups.Tom Lane2019-01-29
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Move a few very simple node-creation and node-type-testing functions from the planner's clauses.c to nodes/makefuncs and nodes/nodeFuncs. There's nothing planner-specific about them, as evidenced by the number of other places that were using them. While at it, rename and_clause() etc to is_andclause() etc, to clarify that they are node-type-testing functions not node-creation functions. And use "static inline" implementations for the shortest ones. Also, modify flatten_join_alias_vars() and some subsidiary functions to take a Query not a PlannerInfo to define the join structure that Vars should be translated according to. They were only using the "parse" field of the PlannerInfo anyway, so this just requires removing one level of indirection. The advantage is that now parse_agg.c can use flatten_join_alias_vars() without the horrid kluge of creating an incomplete PlannerInfo, which will allow that file to be decoupled from relation.h in a subsequent patch. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/11460.1548706639@sss.pgh.pa.us
* In the planner, replace an empty FROM clause with a dummy RTE.Tom Lane2019-01-28
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The fact that "SELECT expression" has no base relations has long been a thorn in the side of the planner. It makes it hard to flatten a sub-query that looks like that, or is a trivial VALUES() item, because the planner generally uses relid sets to identify sub-relations, and such a sub-query would have an empty relid set if we flattened it. prepjointree.c contains some baroque logic that works around this in certain special cases --- but there is a much better answer. We can replace an empty FROM clause with a dummy RTE that acts like a table of one row and no columns, and then there are no such corner cases to worry about. Instead we need some logic to get rid of useless dummy RTEs, but that's simpler and covers more cases than what was there before. For really trivial cases, where the query is just "SELECT expression" and nothing else, there's a hazard that adding the extra RTE makes for a noticeable slowdown; even though it's not much processing, there's not that much for the planner to do overall. However testing says that the penalty is very small, close to the noise level. In more complex queries, this is able to find optimizations that we could not find before. The new RTE type is called RTE_RESULT, since the "scan" plan type it gives rise to is a Result node (the same plan we produced for a "SELECT expression" query before). To avoid confusion, rename the old ResultPath path type to GroupResultPath, reflecting that it's only used in degenerate grouping cases where we know the query produces just one grouped row. (It wouldn't work to unify the two cases, because there are different rules about where the associated quals live during query_planner.) Note: although this touches readfuncs.c, I don't think a catversion bump is required, because the added case can't occur in stored rules, only plans. Patch by me, reviewed by David Rowley and Mark Dilger Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15944.1521127664@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Avoid sharing PARAM_EXEC slots between different levels of NestLoop.Tom Lane2019-01-11
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Up to now, createplan.c attempted to share PARAM_EXEC slots for NestLoopParams across different plan levels, if the same underlying Var was being fed down to different righthand-side subplan trees by different NestLoops. This was, I think, more of an artifact of using subselect.c's PlannerParamItem infrastructure than an explicit design goal, but anyway that was the end result. This works well enough as long as the plan tree is executing synchronously, but the feature whereby Gather can execute the parallelized subplan locally breaks it. An upper NestLoop node might execute for a row retrieved from a parallel worker, and assign a value for a PARAM_EXEC slot from that row, while the leader's copy of the parallelized subplan is suspended with a different active value of the row the Var comes from. When control eventually returns to the leader's subplan, it gets the wrong answers if the same PARAM_EXEC slot is being used within the subplan, as reported in bug #15577 from Bartosz Polnik. This is pretty reminiscent of the problem fixed in commit 46c508fbc, and the proper fix seems to be the same: don't try to share PARAM_EXEC slots across different levels of controlling NestLoop nodes. This requires decoupling NestLoopParam handling from PlannerParamItem handling, although the logic remains somewhat similar. To avoid bizarre division of labor between subselect.c and createplan.c, I decided to move all the param-slot-assignment logic for both cases out of those files and put it into a new file paramassign.c. Hopefully it's a bit better documented now, too. A regression test case for this might be nice, but we don't know a test case that triggers the problem with a suitably small amount of data. Back-patch to 9.6 where we added Gather nodes. It's conceivable that related problems exist in older branches; but without some evidence for that, I'll leave the older branches alone. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15577-ca61ab18904af852@postgresql.org
* Update copyright for 2019Bruce Momjian2019-01-02
| | | | Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.4