aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAge
...
* Stamp copyrights for year 2011.Bruce Momjian2011-01-01
|
* Support triggers on views.Tom Lane2010-10-10
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This patch adds the SQL-standard concept of an INSTEAD OF trigger, which is fired instead of performing a physical insert/update/delete. The trigger function is passed the entire old and/or new rows of the view, and must figure out what to do to the underlying tables to implement the update. So this feature can be used to implement updatable views using trigger programming style rather than rule hacking. In passing, this patch corrects the names of some columns in the information_schema.triggers view. It seems the SQL committee renamed them somewhere between SQL:99 and SQL:2003. Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Bernd Helmle; some additional hacking by me.
* Remove cvs keywords from all files.Magnus Hagander2010-09-20
|
* SERIALIZABLE transactions are actually implemented beneath the covers withJoe Conway2010-09-11
| | | | | | | | | | | transaction snapshots, i.e. a snapshot registered at the beginning of a transaction. Change variable naming and comments to reflect this reality in preparation for a future, truly serializable mode, e.g. Serializable Snapshot Isolation (SSI). For the moment transaction snapshots are still used to implement SERIALIZABLE, but hopefully not for too much longer. Patch by Kevin Grittner and Dan Ports with review and some minor wording changes by me.
* Reset the per-output-tuple exprcontext each time through the main loop inTom Lane2010-08-18
| | | | | | | | | | ExecModifyTable(). This avoids memory leakage when trigger functions leave junk behind in that context (as they more or less must). Problem and solution identified by Dean Rasheed. I'm a bit concerned about the longevity of this solution --- once a plan can have multiple ModifyTable nodes, we are very possibly going to have to do something different. But it should hold up for 9.0.
* Make NestLoop plan nodes pass outer-relation variables into their innerTom Lane2010-07-12
| | | | | | | | | | | | relation using the general PARAM_EXEC executor parameter mechanism, rather than the ad-hoc kluge of passing the outer tuple down through ExecReScan. The previous method was hard to understand and could never be extended to handle parameters coming from multiple join levels. This patch doesn't change the set of possible plans nor have any significant performance effect, but it's necessary infrastructure for future generalization of the concept of an inner indexscan plan. ExecReScan's second parameter is now unused, so it's removed.
* pgindent run for 9.0Bruce Momjian2010-02-26
|
* Remove old-style VACUUM FULL (which was known for a little while asTom Lane2010-02-08
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | VACUUM FULL INPLACE), along with a boatload of subsidiary code and complexity. Per discussion, the use case for this method of vacuuming is no longer large enough to justify maintaining it; not to mention that we don't wish to invest the work that would be needed to make it play nicely with Hot Standby. Aside from the code directly related to old-style VACUUM FULL, this commit removes support for certain WAL record types that could only be generated within VACUUM FULL, redirect-pointer removal in heap_page_prune, and nontransactional generation of cache invalidation sinval messages (the last being the sticking point for Hot Standby). We still have to retain all code that copes with finding HEAP_MOVED_OFF and HEAP_MOVED_IN flag bits on existing tuples. This can't be removed as long as we want to support in-place update from pre-9.0 databases.
* Fix memory leak created by deferrable-index-constraints patches.Tom Lane2010-01-31
| | | | | | | | | We need to free the OID list returned by ExecInsertIndexTuples to avoid a query-lifespan memory leak. When many rows require rechecking, this can be a significant leak --- it's even more than the space used for the queued trigger events. Dean Rasheed
* Update copyright for the year 2010.Bruce Momjian2010-01-02
|
* Add a WHEN clause to CREATE TRIGGER, allowing a boolean expression to beTom Lane2009-11-20
| | | | | | | | | | | checked to determine whether the trigger should be fired. For BEFORE triggers this is mostly a matter of spec compliance; but for AFTER triggers it can provide a noticeable performance improvement, since queuing of a deferred trigger event and re-fetching of the row(s) at end of statement can be short-circuited if the trigger does not need to be fired. Takahiro Itagaki, reviewed by KaiGai Kohei.
* Re-implement EvalPlanQual processing to improve its performance and eliminateTom Lane2009-10-26
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | a lot of strange behaviors that occurred in join cases. We now identify the "current" row for every joined relation in UPDATE, DELETE, and SELECT FOR UPDATE/SHARE queries. If an EvalPlanQual recheck is necessary, we jam the appropriate row into each scan node in the rechecking plan, forcing it to emit only that one row. The former behavior could rescan the whole of each joined relation for each recheck, which was terrible for performance, and what's much worse could result in duplicated output tuples. Also, the original implementation of EvalPlanQual could not re-use the recheck execution tree --- it had to go through a full executor init and shutdown for every row to be tested. To avoid this overhead, I've associated a special runtime Param with each LockRows or ModifyTable plan node, and arranged to make every scan node below such a node depend on that Param. Thus, by signaling a change in that Param, the EPQ machinery can just rescan the already-built test plan. This patch also adds a prohibition on set-returning functions in the targetlist of SELECT FOR UPDATE/SHARE. This is needed to avoid the duplicate-output-tuple problem. It seems fairly reasonable since the other restrictions on SELECT FOR UPDATE are meant to ensure that there is a unique correspondence between source tuples and result tuples, which an output SRF destroys as much as anything else does.
* Split the processing of INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE operations out of execMain.c.Tom Lane2009-10-10
They are now handled by a new plan node type called ModifyTable, which is placed at the top of the plan tree. In itself this change doesn't do much, except perhaps make the handling of RETURNING lists and inherited UPDATEs a tad less klugy. But it is necessary preparation for the intended extension of allowing RETURNING queries inside WITH. Marko Tiikkaja