aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/backend/optimizer/util/orclauses.c
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAge
* Update copyrights for 2020Bruce Momjian2020-01-01
| | | | Backpatch-through: update all files in master, backpatch legal files through 9.4
* Rationalize use of list_concat + list_copy combinations.Tom Lane2019-08-12
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | In the wake of commit 1cff1b95a, the result of list_concat no longer shares the ListCells of the second input. Therefore, we can replace "list_concat(x, list_copy(y))" with just "list_concat(x, y)". To improve call sites that were list_copy'ing the first argument, or both arguments, invent "list_concat_copy()" which produces a new list sharing no ListCells with either input. (This is a bit faster than "list_concat(list_copy(x), y)" because it makes the result list the right size to start with.) In call sites that were not list_copy'ing the second argument, the new semantics mean that we are usually leaking the second List's storage, since typically there is no remaining pointer to it. We considered inventing another list_copy variant that would list_free the second input, but concluded that for most call sites it isn't worth worrying about, given the relative compactness of the new List representation. (Note that in cases where such leakage would happen, the old code already leaked the second List's header; so we're only discussing the size of the leak not whether there is one. I did adjust two or three places that had been troubling to free that header so that they manually free the whole second List.) Patch by me; thanks to David Rowley 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
* 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
* Update copyright for 2019Bruce Momjian2019-01-02
| | | | Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.4
* Update copyright for 2018Bruce Momjian2018-01-02
| | | | Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.3
* Phase 3 of pgindent updates.Tom Lane2017-06-21
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Don't move parenthesized lines to the left, even if that means they flow past the right margin. By default, BSD indent lines up statement continuation lines that are within parentheses so that they start just to the right of the preceding left parenthesis. However, traditionally, if that resulted in the continuation line extending to the right of the desired right margin, then indent would push it left just far enough to not overrun the margin, if it could do so without making the continuation line start to the left of the current statement indent. That makes for a weird mix of indentations unless one has been completely rigid about never violating the 80-column limit. This behavior has been pretty universally panned by Postgres developers. Hence, disable it with indent's new -lpl switch, so that parenthesized lines are always lined up with the preceding left paren. This patch is much less interesting than the first round of indent changes, but also bulkier, so I thought it best to separate the effects. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1dAmxK-0006EE-1r@gemulon.postgresql.org Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/30527.1495162840@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Phase 2 of pgindent updates.Tom Lane2017-06-21
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Change pg_bsd_indent to follow upstream rules for placement of comments to the right of code, and remove pgindent hack that caused comments following #endif to not obey the general rule. Commit e3860ffa4dd0dad0dd9eea4be9cc1412373a8c89 wasn't actually using the published version of pg_bsd_indent, but a hacked-up version that tried to minimize the amount of movement of comments to the right of code. The situation of interest is where such a comment has to be moved to the right of its default placement at column 33 because there's code there. BSD indent has always moved right in units of tab stops in such cases --- but in the previous incarnation, indent was working in 8-space tab stops, while now it knows we use 4-space tabs. So the net result is that in about half the cases, such comments are placed one tab stop left of before. This is better all around: it leaves more room on the line for comment text, and it means that in such cases the comment uniformly starts at the next 4-space tab stop after the code, rather than sometimes one and sometimes two tabs after. Also, ensure that comments following #endif are indented the same as comments following other preprocessor commands such as #else. That inconsistency turns out to have been self-inflicted damage from a poorly-thought-through post-indent "fixup" in pgindent. This patch is much less interesting than the first round of indent changes, but also bulkier, so I thought it best to separate the effects. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1dAmxK-0006EE-1r@gemulon.postgresql.org Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/30527.1495162840@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Improve castNode notation by introducing list-extraction-specific variants.Tom Lane2017-04-10
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This extends the castNode() notation introduced by commit 5bcab1114 to provide, in one step, extraction of a list cell's pointer and coercion to a concrete node type. For example, "lfirst_node(Foo, lc)" is the same as "castNode(Foo, lfirst(lc))". Almost half of the uses of castNode that have appeared so far include a list extraction call, so this is pretty widely useful, and it saves a few more keystrokes compared to the old way. As with the previous patch, back-patch the addition of these macros to pg_list.h, so that the notation will be available when back-patching. Patch by me, after an idea of Andrew Gierth's. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/14197.1491841216@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Reset API of clause_selectivity()Simon Riggs2017-04-06
| | | | Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f9yurJQW9pdnzL+rmOtsp2vOytkpXKGnMFJEO-qz5O5eA@mail.gmail.com
* Collect and use multi-column dependency statsSimon Riggs2017-04-05
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Follow on patch in the multi-variate statistics patch series. CREATE STATISTICS s1 WITH (dependencies) ON (a, b) FROM t; ANALYZE; will collect dependency stats on (a, b) and then use the measured dependency in subsequent query planning. Commit 7b504eb282ca2f5104b5c00b4f05a3ef6bb1385b added CREATE STATISTICS with n-distinct coefficients. These are now specified using the mutually exclusive option WITH (ndistinct). Author: Tomas Vondra, David Rowley Reviewed-by: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI, Álvaro Herrera, Dean Rasheed, Robert Haas and many other comments and contributions Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/56f40b20-c464-fad2-ff39-06b668fac47c@2ndquadrant.com
* Make more use of castNode()Peter Eisentraut2017-02-21
|
* Improve RLS planning by marking individual quals with security levels.Tom Lane2017-01-18
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | In an RLS query, we must ensure that security filter quals are evaluated before ordinary query quals, in case the latter contain "leaky" functions that could expose the contents of sensitive rows. The original implementation of RLS planning ensured this by pushing the scan of a secured table into a sub-query that it marked as a security-barrier view. Unfortunately this results in very inefficient plans in many cases, because the sub-query cannot be flattened and gets planned independently of the rest of the query. To fix, drop the use of sub-queries to enforce RLS qual order, and instead mark each qual (RestrictInfo) with a security_level field establishing its priority for evaluation. Quals must be evaluated in security_level order, except that "leakproof" quals can be allowed to go ahead of quals of lower security_level, if it's helpful to do so. This has to be enforced within the ordering of any one list of quals to be evaluated at a table scan node, and we also have to ensure that quals are not chosen for early evaluation (i.e., use as an index qual or TID scan qual) if they're not allowed to go ahead of other quals at the scan node. This is sufficient to fix the problem for RLS quals, since we only support RLS policies on simple tables and thus RLS quals will always exist at the table scan level only. Eventually these qual ordering rules should be enforced for join quals as well, which would permit improving planning for explicit security-barrier views; but that's a task for another patch. Note that FDWs would need to be aware of these rules --- and not, for example, send an insecure qual for remote execution --- but since we do not yet allow RLS policies on foreign tables, the case doesn't arise. This will need to be addressed before we can allow such policies. Patch by me, reviewed by Stephen Frost and Dean Rasheed. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/8185.1477432701@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Update copyright via script for 2017Bruce Momjian2017-01-03
|
* Adjust spellings of forms of "cancel"Peter Eisentraut2016-07-14
|
* Update copyright for 2016Bruce Momjian2016-01-02
| | | | Backpatch certain files through 9.1
* Improve planner's cost estimation in the presence of semijoins.Tom Lane2015-03-11
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | If we have a semijoin, say SELECT * FROM x WHERE x1 IN (SELECT y1 FROM y) and we're estimating the cost of a parameterized indexscan on x, the number of repetitions of the indexscan should not be taken as the size of y; it'll really only be the number of distinct values of y1, because the only valid plan with y on the outside of a nestloop would require y to be unique-ified before joining it to x. Most of the time this doesn't make that much difference, but sometimes it can lead to drastically underestimating the cost of the indexscan and hence choosing a bad plan, as pointed out by David Kubečka. Fixing this is a bit difficult because parameterized indexscans are costed out quite early in the planning process, before we have the information that would be needed to call estimate_num_groups() and thereby estimate the number of distinct values of the join column(s). However we can move the code that extracts a semijoin RHS's unique-ification columns, so that it's done in initsplan.c rather than on-the-fly in create_unique_path(). That shouldn't make any difference speed-wise and it's really a bit cleaner too. The other bit of information we need is the size of the semijoin RHS, which is easy if it's a single relation (we make those estimates before considering indexscan costs) but problematic if it's a join relation. The solution adopted here is just to use the product of the sizes of the join component rels. That will generally be an overestimate, but since estimate_num_groups() only uses this input as a clamp, an overestimate shouldn't hurt us too badly. In any case we don't allow this new logic to produce a value larger than we would have chosen before, so that at worst an overestimate leaves us no wiser than we were before.
* Update copyright for 2015Bruce Momjian2015-01-06
| | | | Backpatch certain files through 9.0
* Preserve AND/OR flatness while extracting restriction OR clauses.Tom Lane2014-09-09
| | | | | | | | | The code I added in commit f343a880d5555faf1dad0286c5632047c8f599ad was careless about preserving AND/OR flatness: it could create a structure with an OR node directly underneath another one. That breaks an assumption that's fairly important for planning efficiency, not to mention triggering various Asserts (as reported by Benjamin Smith). Add a trifle more logic to handle the case properly.
* pgindent run for 9.4Bruce Momjian2014-05-06
| | | | | This includes removing tabs after periods in C comments, which was applied to back branches, so this change should not effect backpatching.
* Update copyright for 2014Bruce Momjian2014-01-07
| | | | | Update all files in head, and files COPYRIGHT and legal.sgml in all back branches.
* Extract restriction OR clauses whether or not they are indexable.Tom Lane2013-12-30
It's possible to extract a restriction OR clause from a join clause that has the form of an OR-of-ANDs, if each sub-AND includes a clause that mentions only one specific relation. While PG has been aware of that idea for many years, the code previously only did it if it could extract an indexable OR clause. On reflection, though, that seems a silly limitation: adding a restriction clause can be a win by reducing the number of rows that have to be filtered at the join step, even if we have to test the clause as a plain filter clause during the scan. This should be especially useful for foreign tables, where the change can cut the number of rows that have to be retrieved from the foreign server; but testing shows it can win even on local tables. Per a suggestion from Robert Haas. As a heuristic, I made the code accept an extracted restriction clause if its estimated selectivity is less than 0.9, which will probably result in accepting extracted clauses just about always. We might need to tweak that later based on experience. Since the code no longer has even a weak connection to Path creation, remove orindxpath.c and create a new file optimizer/util/orclauses.c. There's some additional janitorial cleanup of now-dead code that needs to happen, but it seems like that's a fit subject for a separate commit.