| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The 'cached-plan-inval' test suite, introduced in 525392d57 under
src/test/modules/delay_execution, aimed to verify that cached plan
invalidation triggers replanning after deferred locks are taken.
However, its ExecutorStart_hook-based approach relies on lock timing
assumptions that, in retrospect, are fragile. This instability was
exposed by failures on BF animal trilobite, which builds with
CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS.
One option was to dynamically disable the cache behavior that causes
the test suite to fail by setting "debug_discard_caches = 0", but it
seems better to remove the suite. The risk of future failures due to
other cache flush hazards outweighs the benefit of catching real
breakage in the backend behavior it tests.
Reported-by: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2990641.1740117879@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Before executing a cached generic plan, AcquireExecutorLocks() in
plancache.c locks all relations in a plan's range table to ensure the
plan is safe for execution. However, this locks runtime-prunable
relations that will later be pruned during "initial" runtime pruning,
introducing unnecessary overhead.
This commit defers locking for such relations to executor startup and
ensures that if the CachedPlan is invalidated due to concurrent DDL
during this window, replanning is triggered. Deferring these locks
avoids unnecessary locking overhead for pruned partitions, resulting
in significant speedup, particularly when many partitions are pruned
during initial runtime pruning.
* Changes to locking when executing generic plans:
AcquireExecutorLocks() now locks only unprunable relations, that is,
those found in PlannedStmt.unprunableRelids (introduced in commit
cbc127917e), to avoid locking runtime-prunable partitions
unnecessarily. The remaining locks are taken by
ExecDoInitialPruning(), which acquires them only for partitions that
survive pruning.
This deferral does not affect the locks required for permission
checking in InitPlan(), which takes place before initial pruning.
ExecCheckPermissions() now includes an Assert to verify that all
relations undergoing permission checks, none of which can be in the
set of runtime-prunable relations, are properly locked.
* Plan invalidation handling:
Deferring locks introduces a window where prunable relations may be
altered by concurrent DDL, invalidating the plan. A new function,
ExecutorStartCachedPlan(), wraps ExecutorStart() to detect and handle
invalidation caused by deferred locking. If invalidation occurs,
ExecutorStartCachedPlan() updates CachedPlan using the new
UpdateCachedPlan() function and retries execution with the updated
plan. To ensure all code paths that may be affected by this handle
invalidation properly, all callers of ExecutorStart that may execute a
PlannedStmt from a CachedPlan have been updated to use
ExecutorStartCachedPlan() instead.
UpdateCachedPlan() replaces stale plans in CachedPlan.stmt_list. A new
CachedPlan.stmt_context, created as a child of CachedPlan.context,
allows freeing old PlannedStmts while preserving the CachedPlan
structure and its statement list. This ensures that loops over
statements in upstream callers of ExecutorStartCachedPlan() remain
intact.
ExecutorStart() and ExecutorStart_hook implementations now return a
boolean value indicating whether plan initialization succeeded with a
valid PlanState tree in QueryDesc.planstate, or false otherwise, in
which case QueryDesc.planstate is NULL. Hook implementations are
required to call standard_ExecutorStart() at the beginning, and if it
returns false, they should do the same without proceeding.
* Testing:
To verify these changes, the delay_execution module tests scenarios
where cached plans become invalid due to changes in prunable relations
after deferred locks.
* Note to extension authors:
ExecutorStart_hook implementations must verify plan validity after
calling standard_ExecutorStart(), as explained earlier. For example:
if (prev_ExecutorStart)
plan_valid = prev_ExecutorStart(queryDesc, eflags);
else
plan_valid = standard_ExecutorStart(queryDesc, eflags);
if (!plan_valid)
return false;
<extension-code>
return true;
Extensions accessing child relations, especially prunable partitions,
via ExecGetRangeTableRelation() must now ensure their RT indexes are
present in es_unpruned_relids (introduced in commit cbc127917e), or
they will encounter an error. This is a strict requirement after this
change, as only relations in that set are locked.
The idea of deferring some locks to executor startup, allowing locks
for prunable partitions to be skipped, was first proposed by Tom Lane.
Reviewed-by: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> (earlier versions)
Reviewed-by: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> (earlier versions)
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> (earlier versions)
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me>
Reviewed-by: Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqFGkMSge6TgC9KQzde0ohpAycLQuV7ooitEEpbKB0O_mg@mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
| |
Backpatch-through: 13
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
as determined by IWYU
Similar to commit dbbca2cf299, but for contrib, pl, and src/test/.
Reviewed-by: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/0df1d5b1-8ca8-4f84-93be-121081bde049%40eisentraut.org
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Reported-by: Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/ZZKTDPxBBMt3C0J9@paquier.xyz
Backpatch-through: 12
|
| |
|
|
| |
Backpatch-through: 11
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The prior commit declared them centrally.
Author: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Reviewed-By: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20211101020311.av6hphdl6xbjbuif@alap3.anarazel.de
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The code for unloading a library has been commented-out for over 12
years, ever since commit 602a9ef5a7c60151e10293ae3c4bb3fbb0132d03, and we're
no closer to supporting it now than we were back then.
Nathan Bossart, reviewed by Michael Paquier and by me.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/Ynsc9bRL1caUSBSE@paquier.xyz
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Commit 75d22069e tried to throw a warning for setting a custom GUC whose
prefix belongs to a previously-loaded extension, if there is no such GUC
defined by the extension. But that caused unstable behavior with
parallel workers, because workers don't necessarily load extensions and
GUCs in the same order their leader did. To make that work safely, we
have to completely disallow the case. We now actually remove any such
GUCs at the time of initial extension load, and then throw an error not
just a warning if you try to add one later. While this might create a
compatibility issue for a few people, the improvement in error-detection
capability seems worth it; it's hard to believe that there's any good
use-case for choosing such GUC names.
This also un-reverts 5609cc01c (Rename EmitWarningsOnPlaceholders() to
MarkGUCPrefixReserved()), since that function's old name is now even
more of a misnomer.
Florin Irion and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1902182.1640711215@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
| |
|
|
| |
Backpatch-through: 10
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Revert commits 5609cc01c, 2ed8a8cc5, and 75d22069e until we have
a less broken idea of how this should work in parallel workers.
Per buildfarm.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1640909.1640638123@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This seems like a clearer name for what it does now.
Provide a compatibility macro so that extensions don't have to convert
to the new name right away.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/116024.1640111629@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Extensions that define any custom GUCs should call
EmitWarningsOnPlaceholders after doing so, to help catch misspellings.
Many of our contrib modules hadn't gotten the memo on that, though.
Also add such calls to src/test/modules extensions that have GUCs.
While these aren't really user-facing, they should illustrate good
practice not faulty practice.
Shinya Kato
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/524fa2c0a34f34b68fbfa90d0760d515@oss.nttdata.com
|
| |
|
|
| |
Backpatch-through: 9.5
|
|
|
We have various cases where we allow DDL on tables to be performed with
less than full AccessExclusiveLock. This requires concurrent queries
to be able to cope with the DDL change mid-flight, but up to now we had
no repeatable way to test such cases. To improve that, invent a test
module that allows halting a backend after planning and then resuming
execution once we've done desired actions in another session. (The same
approach could be used to inject delays in other places, if there's a
suitable hook available.)
This commit includes a single test case, which is meant to exercise the
previously-untestable ExecCreatePartitionPruneState code repaired by
commit 7a980dfc6. We'd probably not bother with this if that were the
only foreseen benefit, but I expect additional test cases will use this
infrastructure in the future.
Test module by Andy Fan, partition-addition test case by me.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200802181131.GA27754@telsasoft.com
|
