| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Commit 13838740f fixed some issues with step generation in partition
pruning, but there was yet another one: get_steps_using_prefix() assumes
that clauses in the passed-in prefix list are sorted in ascending order
of their partition key numbers, but the caller failed to ensure this for
range partitioning, which led to an assertion failure in debug builds.
Adjust the caller function to arrange the clauses in the prefix list in
the required order for range partitioning.
Back-patch to v11, like the previous commit.
Patch by me, reviewed by Amit Langote.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPmGK16jkXiFG0YqMbU66wte-oJTfW6D1HaNvQf%3D%2B5o9%3Dm55wQ%40mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
In the case of range partitioning, get_steps_using_prefix() assumes that
the passed-in prefix list contains at least one clause for each of the
partition keys earlier than one specified in the passed-in
step_lastkeyno, but the caller (ie, gen_prune_steps_from_opexps())
didn't take it into account, which led to a server crash or incorrect
results when the list contained no clauses for such partition keys, as
reported in bug #16500 and #16501 from Kobayashi Hisanori. Update the
caller to call that function only when the list created there contains
at least one clause for each of the earlier partition keys in the case
of range partitioning.
While at it, fix some other issues:
* The list to pass to get_steps_using_prefix() is allowed to contain
multiple clauses for the same partition key, as described in the
comment for that function, but that function actually assumed that the
list contained just a single clause for each of middle partition keys,
which led to an assertion failure when the list contained multiple
clauses for such partition keys. Update that function to match the
comment.
* In the case of hash partitioning, partition keys are allowed to be
NULL, in which case the list to pass to get_steps_using_prefix()
contains no clauses for NULL partition keys, but that function treats
that case as like the case of range partitioning, which led to the
assertion failure. Update the assertion test to take into account
NULL partition keys in the case of hash partitioning.
* Fix a typo in a comment in get_steps_using_prefix_recurse().
* gen_partprune_steps() failed to detect self-contradiction from
strict-qual clauses and an IS NULL clause for the same partition key
in some cases, producing incorrect partition-pruning steps, which led
to incorrect results of partition pruning, but didn't cause any
user-visible problems fortunately, as the self-contradiction is
detected later in the query planning. Update that function to detect
the self-contradiction.
Per bug #16500 and #16501 from Kobayashi Hisanori. Patch by me, initial
diagnosis for the reported issue and review by Dmitry Dolgov.
Back-patch to v11, where partition pruning was introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16500-d1613f2a78e1e090%40postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16501-5234a9a0394f6754%40postgresql.org
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Includes some manual cleanup of places that pgindent messed up,
most of which weren't per project style anyway.
Notably, it seems some people didn't absorb the style rules of
commit c9d297751, because there were a bunch of new occurrences
of function calls with a newline just after the left paren, all
with faulty expectations about how the rest of the call would get
indented.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The additional pain from level 4 is excessive for the gain.
Also revert all the source annotation changes to their original
wordings, to avoid back-patching pain.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/31166.1589378554@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Use it at level 4, a bit more restrictive than the default level, and
tweak our commanding comments to FALLTHROUGH.
(However, leave zic.c alone, since it's external code; to avoid the
warnings that would appear there, change CFLAGS for that file in the
Makefile.)
Author: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200412081825.qyo5vwwco3fv4gdo@nol
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/flat/E1fDenm-0000C8-IJ@gemulon.postgresql.org
|
| |
|
|
| |
Backpatch-through: update all files in master, backpatch legal files through 9.4
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
For most uses of acl.h the details of how "Acl" internally looks like
are irrelevant. It might make sense to move a lot of the
implementation details into a separate header at a later point.
The main motivation of this change is to avoid including fmgr.h (via
array.h, which needs it for exposed structs) in a lot of files that
otherwise don't need it. A subsequent commit will remove the fmgr.h
include from a lot of files.
Directly include utils/array.h and utils/expandeddatum.h from the
files that need them, but previously included them indirectly, via
acl.h.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190803193733.g3l3x3o42uv4qj7l@alap3.anarazel.de
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We only need to invoke constraint exclusion on partitioned tables when
they are a partition, and they themselves contain a default partition;
it's not necessary otherwise, and it's expensive, so avoid it. Also, we
were trying once for each clause separately, but we can do it for all
the clauses at once.
While at it, centralize setting of RelOptInfo->partition_qual instead of
computing it in slightly different ways in different places.
Per complaints from Simon Riggs about 4e85642d935e; reviewed by Yuzuko
Hosoya, Kyotaro Horiguchi.
Author: Amit Langote. I (Álvaro) again mangled the patch somewhat.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CANP8+j+tMCY=nEcQeqQam85=uopLBtX-2vHiLD2bbp7iQQUKpA@mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This addresses some issues with unnecessary code comments, fixes various
typos in docs and comments, and removes some orphaned structures and
definitions.
Author: Alexander Lakhin
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9aabc775-5494-b372-8bcb-4dfc0bd37c68@gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Not much to be said here: commit 9fdb675fc should have checked
constisnull, didn't.
Per report from Piotr Włodarczyk. Back-patch to v11 where
bug was introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAP-dhMr+vRpwizEYjUjsiZ1vwqpohTm+3Pbdt6Pr7FEgPq9R0Q@mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We were applying constraint exclusion on the partition constraint when
generating pruning steps for a clause, but only for the rather
restricted situation of them being boolean OR operators; however it is
possible to have differently shaped clauses that also benefit from
constraint exclusion. This applies particularly to the default
partition since their constraints are in essence a long list of OR'ed
subclauses ... but it applies to other cases too. So in certain cases
we're scanning partitions that we don't need to.
Remove the specialized code in OR clauses, and add a generally
applicable test of the clause refuting the partition constraint; mark
the whole pruning operation as contradictory if it hits.
This has the unwanted side-effect of testing some (most? all?)
constraints more than once if constraint_exclusion=on. That seems
unavoidable as far as I can tell without some additional work, but
that's not the recommended setting for that parameter anyway.
However, because this imposes additional processing cost for all
queries using partitioned tables, I decided not to backpatch this
change.
Author: Amit Langote, Yuzuko Hosoya, Álvaro Herrera
Reviewers: Shawn Wang, Thibaut Madeleine, Yoshikazu Imai, Kyotaro
Horiguchi; they were also uncredited reviewers for commit 489247b0e615.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9bb31dfe-b0d0-53f3-3ea6-e64b811424cf@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
When querying a partitioned table containing a default partition, we
were wrongly deciding to include it in the scan too early in the
process, failing to exclude it in some cases. If we reinterpret the
PruneStepResult.scan_default flag slightly, we can do a better job at
detecting that it can be excluded. The change is that we avoid setting
the flag for that pruning step unless the step absolutely requires the
default partition to be scanned (in contrast with the previous
arrangement, which was to set it unless the step was able to prune it).
So get_matching_partitions() must explicitly check the partition that
each returned bound value corresponds to in order to determine whether
the default one needs to be included, rather than relying on the flag
from the final step result.
Author: Yuzuko Hosoya <hosoya.yuzuko@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/00e601d4ca86$932b8bc0$b982a340$@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
match_clause_to_partition_key incorrectly would return
PARTCLAUSE_UNSUPPORTED if a bool qual could not be matched to the current
partition key. This was a problem, as it causes the calling function to
discard the qual and not try to match it to any other partition key. If
there was another partition key which did match this qual, then the qual
would not be checked again and we could fail to prune some partitions.
The worst this could do was to cause partitions not to be pruned when they
could have been, so there was no danger of incorrect query results here.
Fix this by changing match_boolean_partition_clause to have it return a
PartClauseMatchStatus rather than a boolean value. This allows it to
communicate if the qual is unsupported or if it just does not match this
particular partition key, previously these two cases were treated the
same. Now, if match_clause_to_partition_key is unable to match the qual
to any other qual type then we can simply return the value from the
match_boolean_partition_clause call so that the calling function properly
treats the qual as either unmatched or unsupported.
Reported-by: Rares Salcudean
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote
Backpatch-through: 11 where partition pruning was introduced
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAHp_FN2xwEznH6oyS0hNTuUUZKp5PvegcVv=Co6nBXJ+mC7Y5w@mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Previously, gen_partprune_steps() always built executor pruning steps
using all suitable clauses, including those containing PARAM_EXEC
Params. This meant that the pruning steps were only completely safe
for executor run-time (scan start) pruning. To prune at executor
startup, we had to ignore the steps involving exec Params. But this
doesn't really work in general, since there may be logic changes
needed as well --- for example, pruning according to the last operator's
btree strategy is the wrong thing if we're not applying that operator.
The rules embodied in gen_partprune_steps() and its minions are
sufficiently complicated that tracking their incremental effects in
other logic seems quite impractical.
Short of a complete redesign, the only safe fix seems to be to run
gen_partprune_steps() twice, once to create executor startup pruning
steps and then again for run-time pruning steps. We can save a few
cycles however by noting during the first scan whether we rejected
any clauses because they involved exec Params --- if not, we don't
need to do the second scan.
In support of this, refactor the internal APIs in partprune.c to make
more use of passing information in the GeneratePruningStepsContext
struct, rather than as separate arguments.
This is, I hope, the last piece of our response to a bug report from
Alan Jackson. Back-patch to v11 where this code came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/FAD28A83-AC73-489E-A058-2681FA31D648@tvsquared.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
gen_prune_steps_from_opexps's notion of how to do this was overly
complicated and underly correct.
Per discussion of a report from Alan Jackson (though this fixes only one
aspect of that problem). Back-patch to v11 where this code came in.
Amit Langote
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/FAD28A83-AC73-489E-A058-2681FA31D648@tvsquared.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Cross-type comparison operators in a btree or hash opclass might be
only stable not immutable (this is true of timestamp vs. timestamptz
for example). partprune.c ignored this possibility and would perform
plan-time pruning with them anyway, possibly leading to wrong answers
if the environment changed between planning and execution.
To fix, teach gen_partprune_steps() to do things differently when
creating plan-time pruning steps vs. run-time pruning steps.
analyze_partkey_exprs() also needs an extra check, which is rather
annoying but now is not the time to restructure things enough to
avoid that.
While at it, simplify the logic for the plan-time case a little
by insisting that the comparison value be a Const and nothing else.
This relies on the assumption that eval_const_expressions will have
reduced any immutable expression to a Const; which is not quite
100% true, but certainly any case that comes up often enough to be
interesting should have simplification logic there.
Also improve a bunch of inadequate/obsolete/wrong comments.
Per discussion of a report from Alan Jackson (though this fixes only one
aspect of that problem). Back-patch to v11 where this code came in.
David Rowley, with some further hacking by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/FAD28A83-AC73-489E-A058-2681FA31D648@tvsquared.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Previously, the planner created RangeTblEntry and RelOptInfo structs
for every partition of a partitioned table, even though many of them
might later be deemed uninteresting thanks to partition pruning logic.
This incurred significant overhead when there are many partitions.
Arrange to postpone creation of these data structures until after
we've processed the query enough to identify restriction quals for
the partitioned table, and then apply partition pruning before not
after creation of each partition's data structures. In this way
we need not open the partition relations at all for partitions that
the planner has no real interest in.
For queries that can be proven at plan time to access only a small
number of partitions, this patch improves the practical maximum
number of partitions from under 100 to perhaps a few thousand.
Amit Langote, reviewed at various times by Dilip Kumar, Jesper Pedersen,
Yoshikazu Imai, and David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9d7c5112-cb99-6a47-d3be-cf1ee6862a1d@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
OID and int are the same size, but they are not the same thing.
David Rowley
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f_MhS++XngkTvWL9X1v8M5t-0N0B-R465yHQY=TmNV0Ew@mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Postpone most of the effort of constructing PartitionedRelPruneInfos
until after we have found out whether run-time pruning is needed at all.
This costs very little duplicated effort (basically just an extra
find_base_rel() call per partition) and saves quite a bit when we
can't do run-time pruning.
Also, merge the first loop (for building relid_subpart_map) into
the second loop, since we don't need the map to be valid during
that loop.
Amit Langote
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9d7c5112-cb99-6a47-d3be-cf1ee6862a1d@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This adds a flag "deterministic" to collations. If that is false,
such a collation disables various optimizations that assume that
strings are equal only if they are byte-wise equal. That then allows
use cases such as case-insensitive or accent-insensitive comparisons
or handling of strings with different Unicode normal forms.
This functionality is only supported with the ICU provider. At least
glibc doesn't appear to have any locales that work in a
nondeterministic way, so it's not worth supporting this for the libc
provider.
The term "deterministic comparison" in this context is from Unicode
Technical Standard #10
(https://unicode.org/reports/tr10/#Deterministic_Comparison).
This patch makes changes in three areas:
- CREATE COLLATION DDL changes and system catalog changes to support
this new flag.
- Many executor nodes and auxiliary code are extended to track
collations. Previously, this code would just throw away collation
information, because the eventually-called user-defined functions
didn't use it since they only cared about equality, which didn't
need collation information.
- String data type functions that do equality comparisons and hashing
are changed to take the (non-)deterministic flag into account. For
comparison, this just means skipping various shortcuts and tie
breakers that use byte-wise comparison. For hashing, we first need
to convert the input string to a canonical "sort key" using the ICU
analogue of strxfrm().
Reviewed-by: Daniel Verite <daniel@manitou-mail.org>
Reviewed-by: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/1ccc668f-4cbc-0bef-af67-450b47cdfee7@2ndquadrant.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We still require AccessExclusiveLock on the partition itself, because
otherwise an insert that violates the newly-imposed partition
constraint could be in progress at the same time that we're changing
that constraint; only the lock level on the parent relation is
weakened.
To make this safe, we have to cope with (at least) three separate
problems. First, relevant DDL might commit while we're in the process
of building a PartitionDesc. If so, find_inheritance_children() might
see a new partition while the RELOID system cache still has the old
partition bound cached, and even before invalidation messages have
been queued. To fix that, if we see that the pg_class tuple seems to
be missing or to have a null relpartbound, refetch the value directly
from the table. We can't get the wrong value, because DETACH PARTITION
still requires AccessExclusiveLock throughout; if we ever want to
change that, this will need more thought. In testing, I found it quite
difficult to hit even the null-relpartbound case; the race condition
is extremely tight, but the theoretical risk is there.
Second, successive calls to RelationGetPartitionDesc might not return
the same answer. The query planner will get confused if lookup up the
PartitionDesc for a particular relation does not return a consistent
answer for the entire duration of query planning. Likewise, query
execution will get confused if the same relation seems to have a
different PartitionDesc at different times. Invent a new
PartitionDirectory concept and use it to ensure consistency. This
ensures that a single invocation of either the planner or the executor
sees the same view of the PartitionDesc from beginning to end, but it
does not guarantee that the planner and the executor see the same
view. Since this allows pointers to old PartitionDesc entries to
survive even after a relcache rebuild, also postpone removing the old
PartitionDesc entry until we're certain no one is using it.
For the most part, it seems to be OK for the planner and executor to
have different views of the PartitionDesc, because the executor will
just ignore any concurrently added partitions which were unknown at
plan time; those partitions won't be part of the inheritance
expansion, but invalidation messages will trigger replanning at some
point. Normally, this happens by the time the very next command is
executed, but if the next command acquires no locks and executes a
prepared query, it can manage not to notice until a new transaction is
started. We might want to tighten that up, but it's material for a
separate patch. There would still be a small window where a query
that started just after an ATTACH PARTITION command committed might
fail to notice its results -- but only if the command starts before
the commit has been acknowledged to the user. All in all, the warts
here around serializability seem small enough to be worth accepting
for the considerable advantage of being able to add partitions without
a full table lock.
Although in general the consequences of new partitions showing up
between planning and execution are limited to the query not noticing
the new partitions, run-time partition pruning will get confused in
that case, so that's the third problem that this patch fixes.
Run-time partition pruning assumes that indexes into the PartitionDesc
are stable between planning and execution. So, add code so that if
new partitions are added between plan time and execution time, the
indexes stored in the subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] arrays within
the plan's PartitionedRelPruneInfo get adjusted accordingly. There
does not seem to be a simple way to generalize this scheme to cope
with partitions that are removed, mostly because they could then get
added back again with different bounds, but it works OK for added
partitions.
This code does not try to ensure that every backend participating in
a parallel query sees the same view of the PartitionDesc. That
currently doesn't matter, because we never pass PartitionDesc
indexes between backends. Each backend will ignore the concurrently
added partitions which it notices, and it doesn't matter if different
backends are ignoring different sets of concurrently added partitions.
If in the future that matters, for example because we allow writes in
parallel query and want all participants to do tuple routing to the same
set of partitions, the PartitionDirectory concept could be improved to
share PartitionDescs across backends. There is a draft patch to
serialize and restore PartitionDescs on the thread where this patch
was discussed, which may be a useful place to start.
Patch by me. Thanks to Alvaro Herrera, David Rowley, Simon Riggs,
Amit Langote, and Michael Paquier for discussion, and to Alvaro
Herrera for some review.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobt2upbSocvvDej3yzokd7AkiT+PvgFH+a9-5VV1oJNSQ@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZE0r9-cyA-aY6f8WFEROaDLLL7Vf81kZ8MtFCkxpeQSw@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoY13KQZF-=HNTrt9UYWYx3_oYOQpu9ioNT49jGgiDpUEA@mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This commit moves expand_inherited_tables and underlings from
optimizer/prep/prepunionc.c to optimizer/utils/inherit.c.
Also, all of the AppendRelInfo-based expression manipulation routines
are moved to optimizer/utils/appendinfo.c.
No functional code changes. One exception is the introduction of
make_append_rel_info, but that's still just moving around code.
Also, stop including <limits.h> in prepunion.c, which no longer needs
it since 3fc6e2d7f5b6. I (Álvaro) noticed this because Amit was copying
that to inherit.c, which likewise doesn't need it.
Author: Amit Langote
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3be67028-a00a-502c-199a-da00eec8fb6e@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
| |
Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.4
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Author: Yuzuko Hosoya
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/00ac01d4774c$7feac860$7fc05920$@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Create an array estate->es_relations[] paralleling the es_range_table,
and store references to Relations (relcache entries) there, so that any
given RT entry is opened and closed just once per executor run. Scan
nodes typically still call ExecOpenScanRelation, but ExecCloseScanRelation
is no more; relation closing is now done centrally in ExecEndPlan.
This is slightly more complex than one would expect because of the
interactions with relcache references held in ResultRelInfo nodes.
The general convention is now that ResultRelInfo->ri_RelationDesc does
not represent a separate relcache reference and so does not need to be
explicitly closed; but there is an exception for ResultRelInfos in the
es_trig_target_relations list, which are manufactured by
ExecGetTriggerResultRel and have to be cleaned up by
ExecCleanUpTriggerState. (That much was true all along, but these
ResultRelInfos are now more different from others than they used to be.)
To allow the partition pruning logic to make use of es_relations[] rather
than having its own relcache references, adjust PartitionedRelPruneInfo
to store an RT index rather than a relation OID.
Amit Langote, reviewed by David Rowley and Jesper Pedersen,
some mods by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/468c85d9-540e-66a2-1dde-fec2b741e688@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This has been detected using some interesting tricks with sed, and the
method used is mentioned in details in the discussion below.
Author: Justin Pryzby
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180908013109.GB15350@telsasoft.com
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Author: David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f8du35u5DprpykWvgNEScxapbWYJdHq%2Bz06Wj3Y2KFPbw%40mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This Assert thought that a given rel couldn't be both leaf and
non-leaf, but it turns out that in some unusual plan trees
that's wrong, so remove it.
The lack of testing for cases like that is quite concerning ---
there is little reason for confidence that there aren't other
bugs in the area. But developing a stable test case seems
rather difficult, and in any case we don't need this Assert.
David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJGNTeOkdk=UVuMugmKL7M=owgt4nNr1wjxMg1F+mHsXyLCzFA@mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Commit 1c2cb2744 added some code that tried to detect whether two
RelOptInfos were the "same" rel by pointer comparison; but it turns
out that inheritance_planner breaks that, through its shenanigans
with copying some relations forward into new subproblems. Compare
relid sets instead. Add a regression test case to exercise this
area.
Problem reported by Rushabh Lathia; diagnosis and fix by Amit Langote,
modified a bit by me.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAGPqQf3anJGj65bqAQ9edDr8gF7qig6_avRgwMT9MsZ19COUPw@mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The previous coding here supposed that if run-time partitioning applied to
a particular Append/MergeAppend plan, then all child plans of that node
must be members of a single partitioning hierarchy. This is totally wrong,
since an Append could be formed from a UNION ALL: we could have multiple
hierarchies sharing the same Append, or child plans that aren't part of any
hierarchy.
To fix, restructure the related plan-time and execution-time data
structures so that we can have a separate list or array for each
partitioning hierarchy. Also track subplans that are not part of any
hierarchy, and make sure they don't get pruned.
Per reports from Phil Florent and others. Back-patch to v11, since
the bug originated there.
David Rowley, with a lot of cosmetic adjustments by me; thanks also
to Amit Langote for review.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/HE1PR03MB17068BB27404C90B5B788BCABA7B0@HE1PR03MB1706.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Now that the bms_add_range boundary protections are gone, some
alternative ones are needed in a few places.
Author: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3437ccf8-a144-55ff-1e2f-fc16b437823b@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The original code was unable to prune partitions that could not possibly
contain NULL values, when the query specified less than all columns in a
multicolumn partition key. Reorder the if-tests so that it is, and add
more commentary and regression tests.
Reported-by: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Co-authored-by: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Co-authored-by: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Reviewed-by: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Reviewed-by: amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFjFpRc7qjLUfXLVBBC_HAnx644sjTYM=qVoT3TJ840HPbsTXw@mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We were using 'partition rel' in a few places, which is quite confusing.
Author: Amit Langote
Reviewed-by: David Rowley
Reviewed-by: Michaël Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/fd256561-31a2-4b7e-cd84-d8241e7ebc3f@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fix inconsistent decisions about NOMATCH vs UNSUPPORTED result codes.
If we're going to cater for partkeys that have the same expression and
different collations, surely we should also support partkeys with the
same expression and different opclasses.
Clean up shaky handling of commuted opclauses, eg checking the wrong
operator to see what its negator is. This wouldn't cause any actual
bugs given a sane opclass definition, but it doesn't seem helpful to
expend more code to be less correct.
Improve handling of null elements in ScalarArrayOp arrays: in the
"op ALL" case, we can conclude they result in an unsatisfiable clause.
Minor cosmetic changes and comment improvements.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
"compute_hash_value" is particularly gratuitously generic, but IMO
all of these ought to have names clearly related to partitioning.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The previous coding saved pointers into the partitioned table's relcache
entry, but then closed the relcache entry, causing those pointers to
nominally become dangling. Actual trouble would be seen in the field
only if a relcache flush occurred mid-query, but that's hardly out of
the question.
While we could fix this by copying all the data in question at query
start, it seems better to just hold the relcache entry open for the
whole query.
While at it, improve the handling of support-function lookups: do that
once per query not once per pruning test. There's still something to be
desired here, in that we fail to exploit the possibility of caching data
across queries in the fn_extra fields of the relcache's FmgrInfo structs,
which could happen if we just used those structs in-place rather than
copying them. However, combining that with the possibility of per-query
lookups of cross-type comparison functions seems to require changes in the
APIs of a lot of the pruning support functions, so it's too invasive to
consider as part of this patch. A win would ensue only for complex
partition key data types (e.g. arrays), so it may not be worth the
trouble.
David Rowley and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17850.1528755844@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
No code changes except for a couple of new Asserts.
David Rowley and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f-6GODRNgEtdPxCnAPme2h2hTztB6LmtfdmcYAAOE0kQg@mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The previous coding just ignored pruning constraints that compare a
partition key to a null-valued expression. This is silly, since really
what we can do there is conclude that all partitions are rejected: the
pruning operator is known strict so the comparison must always fail.
This also fixes the logic to not ignore constisnull for a Const comparison
value. That's probably an unreachable case, since the planner would
normally have simplified away a strict operator with a constant-null input.
But this code has no business assuming that.
David Rowley, per a gripe from me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/26279.1528670981@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Use "subplan" rather than "subnode" to refer to the child plans of
a partitioning Append; this seems a bit more specific and hence
clearer. Improve assorted comments. No non-cosmetic changes.
David Rowley and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFj8pRBjrufA3ocDm8o4LPGNye9Y+pm1b9kCwode4X04CULG3g@mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The initial coding of the run-time-pruning feature only coped with cases
where the partition key(s) are compared to Params. That is a bit silly;
we can allow it to work with any non-Var-containing stable expression, as
long as we take special care with expressions containing PARAM_EXEC Params.
The code is hardly any longer this way, and it's considerably clearer
(IMO at least). Per gripe from Pavel Stehule.
David Rowley, whacked around a bit by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFj8pRBjrufA3ocDm8o4LPGNye9Y+pm1b9kCwode4X04CULG3g@mail.gmail.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
match_clause_to_partition_key failed to consider COERCION_PATH_ARRAYCOERCE
cases in scalar-op-array expressions, so it was possible to crash the
server easily. To handle this case properly (ie. prune partitions) we
would need to run a bit of executor code during planning. Maybe it can
be improved, but for now let's just not crash. Add a test case that
used to trigger the crash.
Author: Michaël Paquier
match_clause_to_partition_key failed to indicate that operators that
don't have a commutator in a btree opclass are unsupported. It is
possible for this to cause a crash later if such an operator is used in
a scalar-op-array expression. Add a test case that used to the crash.
Author: Amit Langote
One caller of gen_partprune_steps_internal in
match_clause_to_partition_key was too optimistic about the former never
returning an empty step list. Rid it of its innocence. (Having fixed
the bug above, I no longer know how to exploit this, so no test case for
it, but it remained a bug.) Revise code flow a little bit, for
succintness.
Author: Álvaro Herrera
Reported-by: Marina Polyakova
Reviewed-by: Michaël Paquier
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote
Reviewed-by: Álvaro Herrera
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/ff8f9bfa485ff961d6bb43e54120485b@postgrespro.ru
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
There's no need to export this function, so don't. Michaël didn't
actually write the patch, but we list him as first author because with a
trivial one like this, intellectual authorship is as important (if not
more) as bit shovelling.
Author: Michaël Paquier, Amit Langote
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/c91299c4-199b-0f16-339b-a29d6d2a39ee@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Author: Michael Paquier
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote
Reviewed-by: Álvaro Herrera
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180424012042.GD1570@paquier.xyz
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180509061039.GC11897@paquier.xyz
|
| |
|
|
| |
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15719.1523984266@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Instead of doing ExecInitExpr every time a Param needs to be evaluated
in run-time partition pruning, do it once during run-time pruning
set-up and cache the exprstate in PartitionPruneContext, saving a lot of
work.
Author: David Rowley
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote, Álvaro Herrera
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f8-x+q-90QAPDu_okhQBV4DPEtPz8CJ=m0940GyT4DA4w@mail.gmail.com
|
