Commit e2d4ef8de8 (the fix for CVE-2017-7484) added security checks
to the selectivity estimation functions to prevent them from running
user-supplied operators on data obtained from pg_statistic if the user
lacks privileges to select from the underlying table. In cases
involving inheritance/partitioning, those checks were originally
performed against the child RTE (which for plain inheritance might
actually refer to the parent table). Commit 553d2ec271 then extended
that to also check the parent RTE, allowing access if the user had
permissions on either the parent or the child. It turns out, however,
that doing any checks using the child RTE is incorrect, since
securityQuals is set to NULL when creating an RTE for an inheritance
child (whether it refers to the parent table or the child table), and
therefore such checks do not correctly account for any RLS policies or
security barrier views. Therefore, do the security checks using only
the parent RTE. This is consistent with how RLS policies are applied,
and the executor's ACL checks, both of which use only the parent
table's permissions/policies. Similar checks are performed in the
extended stats code, so update that in the same way, centralizing all
the checks in a new function.
In addition, note that these checks by themselves are insufficient to
ensure that the user has access to the table's data because, in a
query that goes via a view, they only check that the view owner has
permissions on the underlying table, not that the current user has
permissions on the view itself. In the selectivity estimation
functions, there is no easy way to navigate from underlying tables to
views, so add permissions checks for all views mentioned in the query
to the planner startup code. If the user lacks permissions on a view,
a permissions error will now be reported at planner-startup, and the
selectivity estimation functions will not be run.
Checking view permissions at planner-startup in this way is a little
ugly, since the same checks will be repeated at executor-startup.
Longer-term, it might be better to move all the permissions checks
from the executor to the planner so that permissions errors can be
reported sooner, instead of creating a plan that won't ever be run.
However, such a change seems too far-reaching to be back-patched.
Back-patch to all supported versions. In v13, there is the added
complication that UPDATEs and DELETEs on inherited target tables are
planned using inheritance_planner(), which plans each inheritance
child table separately, so that the selectivity estimation functions
do not know that they are dealing with a child table accessed via its
parent. Handle that by checking access permissions on the top parent
table at planner-startup, in the same way as we do for views. Any
securityQuals on the top parent table are moved down to the child
tables by inheritance_planner(), so they continue to be checked by the
selectivity estimation functions.
Author: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Reviewed-by: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Backpatch-through: 13
Security: CVE-2025-8713
Commit ac04aa84a put the shutoff for this into the planner, which is
not ideal because it doesn't prevent us from re-using a previously
made parallel plan. Revert the planner change and instead put the
shutoff into InitializeParallelDSM, modeling it on the existing code
there for recovering from failure to allocate a DSM segment.
However, that code path is mostly untested, and testing a bit harder
showed there's at least one bug: ExecHashJoinReInitializeDSM is not
prepared for us to have skipped doing parallel DSM setup. I also
thought the Assert in ReinitializeParallelWorkers is pretty
ill-advised, and replaced it with a silent Min() operation.
The existing test case added by ac04aa84a serves fine to test this
version of the fix, so no change needed there.
Patch by me, but thanks to Noah Misch for the core idea that we
could shut off worker creation when !INTERRUPTS_CAN_BE_PROCESSED.
Back-patch to v12, as ac04aa84a was.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAC-SaSzHUKT=vZJ8MPxYdC_URPfax+yoA1hKTcF4ROz_Q6z0_Q@mail.gmail.com
If the collation of any grouping column doesn’t match the collation of
the corresponding partition key, partitionwise grouping can yield
incorrect results. For example, rows that would be grouped under the
grouping collation may end up in different partitions under the
partitioning collation. In such cases, full partitionwise grouping
would produce results that differ from those without partitionwise
grouping, so disallowed that.
Partial partitionwise aggregation is still allowed, as the Finalize
step reconciles partition-level aggregates with grouping requirements
across all partitions, ensuring that the final output remains
consistent.
This commit also fixes group_by_has_partkey() by ensuring the
RelabelType node is stripped from grouping expressions when matching
them to partition key expressions to avoid false mismatches.
Bug: #18568
Reported-by: Webbo Han <1105066510@qq.com>
Author: Webbo Han <1105066510@qq.com>
Reviewed-by: Tender Wang <tndrwang@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com>
Reviewed-by: Jian He <jian.universality@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18568-2a9afb6b9f7e6ed3@postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/tencent_9D9103CDA420C07768349CC1DFF88465F90A@qq.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAHewXNno_HKiQ6PqyLYfuqDtwp7KKHZiH1J7Pqyz0nr+PS2Dwg@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 12
This reverts commit eae7be600b, following a discussion with Tom Lane,
due to concerns that this impacts the decisions made by the planner for
the number of workers spawned based on the inlining and const-folding of
index expressions and predicate for cases that would have worked until
this commit.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/162802.1709746091@sss.pgh.pa.us
Backpatch-through: 12
As coded, the planner logic that calculates the number of parallel
workers to use for a parallel index build uses expressions and
predicates from the relcache, which are flattened for the planner by
eval_const_expressions().
As reported in the bug, an immutable parallel-unsafe function flattened
in the relcache would become a Const, which would be considered as
parallel-safe, even if the predicate or the expressions including the
function are not safe in parallel workers. Depending on the expressions
or predicate used, this could cause the parallel build to fail.
Tests are included that check parallel index builds with parallel-unsafe
predicate and expressions. Two routines are added to lsyscache.h to be
able to retrieve expressions and predicate of an index from its pg_index
data.
Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin
Author: Tender Wang
Reviewed-by: Jian He, Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAHewXN=UaAaNn9ruHDH3Os8kxLVmtWqbssnf=dZN_s9=evHUFA@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 12
This commit reverts the work done by commits 3ba59ccc89 and 72e78d831a.
Those commits were incorrect in asserting that we never acquire any other
heavy-weight lock after acquring page lock other than relation extension
lock. We can acquire a lock on catalogs while doing catalog look up after
acquring page lock.
This won't impact any existing feature but we need to think some other way
to achieve this before parallelizing other write operations or even
improving the parallelism in vacuum (like allowing multiple workers
for an index).
Reported-by: Jaime Casanova
Author: Amit Kapila
Backpatch-through: 13
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJKUy5jffnRKNvRHKQ0LynRb0RJC-o4P8Ku3x9vGAVLwDBWumQ@mail.gmail.com
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
We already tried to fix this in commits 3f7323cbb et al (and follow-on
fixes), but now it emerges that there are still unfixed cases;
moreover, these cases affect all branches not only pre-v14. I thought
we had eliminated all cases of making multiple clones of an UPDATE's
target list when we nuked inheritance_planner. But it turns out we
still do that in some partitioned-UPDATE cases, notably including
INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE, because ExecInitPartitionInfo thinks
it's okay to clone and modify the parent's targetlist.
This fix is based on a suggestion from Andres Freund: let's stop
abusing the ParamExecData.execPlan mechanism, which was only ever
meant to handle initplans, and instead solve the execution timing
problem by having the expression compiler move MULTIEXPR_SUBLINK steps
to the front of their expression step lists. This is feasible because
(a) all branches still in support compile the entire targetlist of
an UPDATE into a single ExprState, and (b) we know that all
MULTIEXPR_SUBLINKs do need to be evaluated --- none could be buried
inside a CASE, for example. There is a minor semantics change
concerning the order of execution of the MULTIEXPR's subquery versus
other parts of the parent targetlist, but that seems like something
we can get away with. By doing that, we no longer need to worry
about whether different clones of a MULTIEXPR_SUBLINK share output
Params; their usage of that data structure won't overlap.
Per bug #17800 from Alexander Lakhin. Back-patch to all supported
branches. In v13 and earlier, we can revert 3f7323cbb and follow-on
fixes; however, I chose to keep the SubPlan.subLinkId field added
in ccbb54c72. We don't need that anymore in the core code, but it's
cheap enough to fill, and removing a plan node field in a minor
release seems like it'd be asking for trouble.
Andres Freund and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17800-ff90866b3906c964@postgresql.org
Prior to v14, if we have a MULTIEXPR SubPlan (that is, use of the syntax
UPDATE ... SET (c1, ...) = (SELECT ...)) in an UPDATE with an inherited
or partitioned target table, inheritance_planner() will clone the
targetlist and therefore also the MULTIEXPR SubPlan and the Param nodes
referencing it for each child target table. Up to now, we've allowed
all the clones to share the underlying subplan as well as the output
parameter IDs -- that is, the runtime ParamExecData slots. That
technique is borrowed from the far older code that supports initplans,
and it works okay in that case because the cloned SubPlan nodes are
essentially identical. So it doesn't matter which one of the clones
the shared ParamExecData.execPlan field might point to.
However, this fails to hold for MULTIEXPR SubPlans, because they can
have nonempty "args" lists (values to be passed into the subplan), and
those lists could get mutated to different states in the various clones.
In the submitted reproducer, as well as the test case added here, one
clone contains Vars with varno OUTER_VAR where another has INNER_VAR,
because the child tables are respectively on the outer or inner side of
the join. Sharing the execPlan pointer can result in trying to evaluate
an args list that doesn't match the local execution state, with mayhem
ensuing. The result often is to trigger consistency checks in the
executor, but I believe this could end in a crash or incorrect updates.
To fix, assign new Param IDs to each of the cloned SubPlans, so that
they don't share ParamExecData slots at runtime. It still seems fine
for the clones to share the underlying subplan, and extra ParamExecData
slots are cheap enough that this fix shouldn't cost much.
This has been busted since we invented MULTIEXPR SubPlans in 9.5.
Probably the lack of previous reports is because query plans in which
the different clones of a MULTIEXPR mutate to effectively-different
states are pretty rare. There's no issue in v14 and later, because
without inheritance_planner() there's never a reason to clone
MULTIEXPR SubPlans.
Per bug #17596 from Andre Lin. Patch v10-v13 only.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17596-c5357f61427a81dc@postgresql.org
If a function-in-FROM laterally references the output of some sub-SELECT
earlier in the FROM clause, and we are able to flatten that sub-SELECT
into the outer query, the expression(s) copied into the function RTE
missed being processed by eval_const_expressions. This'd lead to trouble
and probable crashes at execution if such expressions contained
named-argument function call syntax or functions with defaulted arguments.
The bug is masked if the query contains any explicit JOIN syntax, which
may help explain why we'd not noticed.
Per bug #17227 from Bernd Dorn. This is an oversight in commit 7266d0997,
so back-patch to v13 where that came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17227-5a28ed1512189fa4@postgresql.org
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
This can't work if there's no postmaster, and indeed the code got an
assertion failure trying. There should be a check on IsUnderPostmaster
gating the use of parallelism, as the planner has for ordinary
parallel queries.
Commit 40d964ec9 got this right, so follow its model of checking
IsUnderPostmaster at the same place where we check for
max_parallel_maintenance_workers == 0. In general, new code
implementing parallel utility operations should do the same.
Report and patch by Yulin Pei, cosmetically adjusted by me.
Back-patch to v11 where this code came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/HK0PR01MB22747D839F77142D7E76A45DF4F50@HK0PR01MB2274.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com
We have a dozen or so places that need to iterate over all but the
first cell of a List. Prior to v13 this was typically written as
for_each_cell(lc, lnext(list_head(list)))
Commit 1cff1b95a changed these to
for_each_cell(lc, list, list_second_cell(list))
This patch introduces a new macro for_each_from() which expresses
the start point as a list index, allowing these to be written as
for_each_from(lc, list, 1)
This is marginally more efficient, since ForEachState.i can be
initialized directly instead of backing into it from a ListCell
address. It also seems clearer and less typo-prone.
Some of the remaining uses of for_each_cell() look like they could
profitably be changed to for_each_from(), but here I confined myself
to changing uses of list_second_cell().
Also, fix for_each_cell_setup() and for_both_cell_setup() to
const-ify their arguments; that's a simple oversight in 1cff1b95a.
Back-patch into v13, on the grounds that (1) the const-ification
is a minor bug fix, and (2) it's better for back-patching purposes
if we only have two ways to write these loops rather than three.
In HEAD, also remove list_third_cell() and list_fourth_cell(),
which were also introduced in 1cff1b95a, and are unused as of
cc99baa43. It seems unlikely that any third-party code would
have started to use them already; anyone who has can be directed
to list_nth_cell instead.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvpo1zj9KhEpU2cCRZfSM3Q6XGdhzuAS2v79PH7WJBkYVA@mail.gmail.com
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.
Note: This GUC was originally named enable_hashagg_disk when it appeared
in commit 1f39bce0, which added disk-based hash aggregation. It was
subsequently renamed in commit 92c58fd9.
Author: Peter Geoghegan
Reviewed-By: Jeff Davis, Álvaro Herrera
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9d9d1e1252a52ea1bad84ea40dbebfd54e672a0f.camel%40j-davis.com
Backpatch: 13-, where disk-based hash aggregation was introduced.
Eliminate enable_groupingsets_hash_disk, which was primarily useful
for testing grouping sets that use HashAgg and spill. Instead, hack
the table stats to convince the planner to choose hashed aggregation
for grouping sets that will spill to disk. Suggested by Melanie
Plageman.
Rename enable_hashagg_disk to hashagg_avoid_disk_plan, and invert the
meaning of on/off. The new name indicates more strongly that it only
affects the planner. Also, the word "avoid" is less definite, which
should avoid surprises when HashAgg still needs to use the
disk. Change suggested by Justin Pryzby, though I chose a different
GUC name.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAKRu_aisiENMsPM2gC4oUY1hHG3yrCwY-fXUg22C6_MJUwQdA%40mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200610021544.GA14879@telsasoft.com
Backpatch-through: 13
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.
It was previously thought that remove_useless_groupby_columns() needed to
keep track of which constraints the generated plan depended upon, however,
this is unnecessary. The confusion likely arose regarding this because of
check_functional_grouping(), which does need to track the dependency to
ensure VIEWs with columns which are functionally dependant on the GROUP BY
remain so. For remove_useless_groupby_columns(), cached plans will just
become invalidated when the primary key's underlying index is removed
through the normal relcache invalidation code.
Here we just remove the unneeded code which records the dependency and
updates the comments. The previous comments claimed that we could not use
UNIQUE constraints for the same optimization due to lack of a
pg_constraint record for NOT NULL constraints (which are required because
NULLs can be duplicated in a unique index). Since we don't actually need a
pg_constraint record to handle the invalidation, it looks like we could
add code to do this in the future. But not today.
We're not really fixing any bug in the code here, this fix is just to set
the record straight on UNIQUE constraints. This code was added back in
9.6, but due to lack of any bug, we'll not be backpatching this.
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvrdYa=VhOoMe4ZZjZ-G4ALnD-xuAeUNCRTL+PYMVN8OnQ@mail.gmail.com
Commit d2d8a229bc introduced Incremental Sort, but it was considered
only in create_ordered_paths() as an alternative to regular Sort. There
are many other places that require sorted input and might benefit from
considering Incremental Sort too.
This patch modifies a number of those places, but not all. The concern
is that just adding Incremental Sort to any place that already adds
Sort may increase the number of paths considered, negatively affecting
planning time, without any benefit. So we've taken a more conservative
approach, based on analysis of which places do affect a set of queries
that did seem practical. This means some less common queries may not
benefit from Incremental Sort yet.
Author: Tomas Vondra
Reviewed-by: James Coleman
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPpHfds1waRZ=NOmueYq0sx1ZSCnt+5QJvizT8ndT2=etZEeAQ@mail.gmail.com
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
This commit adds query_string argument into the planner-related functions
and hook and allows us to pass the query string to them.
Currently there is no user of the query string passed. But the upcoming patch
for the planning counters will add the planning hook function into
pg_stat_statements and the function will need the query string. So this change
will be necessary for that patch.
Also this change is useful for some extensions that want to use the query
string in their planner hook function.
Author: Pascal Legrand, Julien Rouhaud
Reviewed-by: Yoshikazu Imai, Tom Lane, Fujii Masao
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAOBaU_bU1m3_XF5qKYtSj1ua4dxd=FWDyh2SH4rSJAUUfsGmAQ@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1583789487074-0.post@n3.nabble.com
This is required as it is no safer for two related processes to perform
clean up in gin indexes at a time than for unrelated processes to do the
same. After acquiring page locks, we can acquire relation extension lock
but reverse never happens which means these will also not participate in
deadlock. So, avoid checking wait edges from this lock.
Currently, the parallel mode is strictly read-only, but after this patch
we have the infrastructure to allow parallel inserts and parallel copy.
Author: Dilip Kumar, Amit Kapila
Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila, Kuntal Ghosh and Sawada Masahiko
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAD21AoCmT3cFQUN4aVvzy5chw7DuzXrJCbrjTU05B+Ss=Gn1LA@mail.gmail.com
While performing hash aggregation, track memory usage when adding new
groups to a hash table. If the memory usage exceeds work_mem, enter
"spill mode".
In spill mode, new groups are not created in the hash table(s), but
existing groups continue to be advanced if input tuples match. Tuples
that would cause a new group to be created are instead spilled to a
logical tape to be processed later.
The tuples are spilled in a partitioned fashion. When all tuples from
the outer plan are processed (either by advancing the group or
spilling the tuple), finalize and emit the groups from the hash
table. Then, create new batches of work from the spilled partitions,
and select one of the saved batches and process it (possibly spilling
recursively).
Author: Jeff Davis
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra, Adam Lee, Justin Pryzby, Taylor Vesely, Melanie Plageman
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/507ac540ec7c20136364b5272acbcd4574aa76ef.camel@j-davis.com
This follows multiple complains from Peter Geoghegan, Andres Freund and
Alvaro Herrera that this issue ought to be dug more before actually
happening, if it happens.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20191226144606.GA5659@alvherre.pgsql
The following renaming is done so as source files related to index
access methods are more consistent with table access methods (the
original names used for index AMs ware too generic, and could be
confused as including features related to table AMs):
- amapi.h -> indexam.h.
- amapi.c -> indexamapi.c. Here we have an equivalent with
backend/access/table/tableamapi.c.
- amvalidate.c -> indexamvalidate.c.
- amvalidate.h -> indexamvalidate.h.
- genam.c -> indexgenam.c.
- genam.h -> indexgenam.h.
This has been discussed during the development of v12 when table AM was
worked on, but the renaming never happened.
Author: Michael Paquier
Reviewed-by: Fabien Coelho, Julien Rouhaud
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20191223053434.GF34339@paquier.xyz
This patch causes EXPLAIN to always assign a separate table alias to the
parent RTE of an append relation (inheritance set); before, such RTEs
were ignored if not actually scanned by the plan. Since the child RTEs
now always have that same alias to start with (cf. commit 55a1954da),
the net effect is that the parent RTE usually gets the alias used or
implied by the query text, and the children all get that alias with "_N"
appended. (The exception to "usually" is if there are duplicate aliases
in different subtrees of the original query; then some of those original
RTEs will also have "_N" appended.)
This results in more uniform output for partitioned-table plans than
we had before: the partitioned table itself gets the original alias,
and all child tables have aliases with "_N", rather than the previous
behavior where one of the children would get an alias without "_N".
The reason for giving the parent RTE an alias, even if it isn't scanned
by the plan, is that we now use the parent's alias to qualify Vars that
refer to an appendrel output column and appear above the Append or
MergeAppend that computes the appendrel. But below the append, Vars
refer to some one of the child relations, and are displayed that way.
This seems clearer than the old behavior where a Var that could carry
values from any child relation was displayed as if it referred to only
one of them.
While at it, change ruleutils.c so that the code paths used by EXPLAIN
deal in Plan trees not PlanState trees. This effectively reverts a
decision made in commit 1cc29fe7c, which seemed like a good idea at
the time to make ruleutils.c consistent with explain.c. However,
it's problematic because we'd really like to allow executor startup
pruning to remove all the children of an append node when possible,
leaving no child PlanState to resolve Vars against. (That's not done
here, but will be in the next patch.) This requires different handling
of subplans and initplans than before, but is otherwise a pretty
straightforward change.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/001001d4f44b$2a2cca50$7e865ef0$@lab.ntt.co.jp
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
This allows simplification of the plan tree in some common usage
patterns: we can get rid of a join to the function RTE.
In principle we could pull up any immutable expression, but restricting
it to Consts avoids the risk that multiple evaluations of the expression
might cost more than we can save. (Possibly this could be improved in
future --- but we've more or less promised people that putting a function
in FROM guarantees single evaluation, so we'd have to tread carefully.)
To do this, we need to rearrange when eval_const_expressions()
happens for expressions in function RTEs. I moved it to
inline_set_returning_functions(), which already has to iterate over
every function RTE, and in consequence renamed that function to
preprocess_function_rtes(). A useful consequence is that
inline_set_returning_function() no longer has to do this for itself,
simplifying that code.
In passing, break out pull_up_simple_subquery's code that knows where
everything that needs pullup_replace_vars() processing is, so that
the new pull_up_constant_function() routine can share it. We'd
gotten away with one-and-a-half copies of that code so far, since
pull_up_simple_values() could assume that a lot of cases didn't apply
to it --- but I don't think pull_up_constant_function() can make any
simplifying assumptions. Might as well make pull_up_simple_values()
use it too.
(Possibly this refactoring should go further: maybe we could share
some of the code to fill in the pullup_replace_vars_context struct?
For now, I left it that the callers fill that completely.)
Note: the one existing test case that this patch changes has to be
changed because inlining its function RTEs would destroy the point
of the test, namely to check join order.
Alexander Kuzmenkov and Aleksandr Parfenov, reviewed by
Antonin Houska and Anastasia Lubennikova, and whacked around
some more by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/402356c32eeb93d4fed01f66d6c7fe2d@postgrespro.ru
Previously in order to determine which ECs a relation had members in, we
had to loop over all ECs stored in PlannerInfo's eq_classes and check if
ec_relids mentioned the relation. For the most part, this was fine, as
generally, unless queries were fairly complex, the overhead of performing
the lookup would have not been that significant. However, when queries
contained large numbers of joins and ECs, the overhead to find the set of
classes matching a given set of relations could become a significant
portion of the overall planning effort.
Here we allow a much more efficient method to access the ECs which match a
given relation or set of relations. A new Bitmapset field in RelOptInfo
now exists to store the indexes into PlannerInfo's eq_classes list which
each relation is mentioned in. This allows very fast lookups to find all
ECs belonging to a single relation. When we need to lookup ECs belonging
to a given pair of relations, we can simply bitwise-AND the Bitmapsets from
each relation and use the result to perform the lookup.
We also take the opportunity to write a new implementation of
generate_join_implied_equalities which makes use of the new indexes.
generate_join_implied_equalities_for_ecs must remain as is as it can be
given a custom list of ECs, which we can't easily determine the indexes of.
This was originally intended to fix the performance penalty of looking up
foreign keys matching a join condition which was introduced by 100340e2d.
However, we're speeding up much more than just that here.
Author: David Rowley, Tom Lane
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Tomas Vondra
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/6970.1545327857@sss.pgh.pa.us
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
d4c3a156c added code to remove columns that were not part of a table's
PRIMARY KEY constraint from the GROUP BY clause when all the primary key
columns were present in the group by. This is fine to do since we know
that there will only be one row per group coming from this relation.
However, the logic failed to consider inheritance parent relations. These
can have child relations without a primary key, but even if they did, they
could duplicate one of the parent's rows or one from another child
relation. In this case, those additional GROUP BY columns are required.
Fix this by disabling the optimization for inheritance parent tables.
In v11 and beyond, partitioned tables are fine since partitions cannot
overlap and before v11 partitioned tables could not have a primary key.
Reported-by: Manuel Rigger
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+u7OA7VLKf_vEr6kLF3MnWSA9LToJYncgpNX2tQ-oWzYCBQAw@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 9.6
The logic in reorder_grouping_sets to order grouping set elements to
match a pre-specified sort ordering was defective, resulting in
unnecessary sort nodes (though the query output would still be
correct). Repair, simplifying the code a little, and add a test.
Per report from Richard Guo, though I didn't use their patch. Original
bug seems to have been my fault.
Backpatch back to 9.5 where grouping sets were introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAN_9JTzyjGcUjiBHxLsgqfk7PkdLGXiM=pwM+=ph2LsWw0WO1A@mail.gmail.com
In commit 7012b132d0, which added support for aggregate pushdown in
postgres_fdw, the expense of evaluating the final scan/join target
computed by make_group_input_target() was not accounted for at all in
costing aggregate pushdown paths with local statistics. The right fix
for this would be to have a separate upper stage to adjust the final
scan/join relation (see comments for apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths());
but for now, fix by adding the tlist eval cost when costing aggregate
pushdown paths with local statistics.
Apply this to HEAD only to avoid destabilizing existing plan choices.
Author: Etsuro Fujita
Reviewed-By: Antonin Houska
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/5C66A056.60007%40lab.ntt.co.jp
The interaction of these parameters was a bit confused/confusing,
and in fact v11 entirely misses the opportunity to apply partition
constraints when a partition is accessed directly (rather than
indirectly from its parent).
In HEAD, establish the principle that enable_partition_pruning controls
partition pruning and nothing else. When accessing a partition via its
parent, we do partition pruning (if enabled by enable_partition_pruning)
and then there is no need to consider partition constraints in the
constraint_exclusion logic. When accessing a partition directly, its
partition constraints are applied by the constraint_exclusion logic,
only if constraint_exclusion = on.
In v11, we can't have such a clean division of these GUCs' effects,
partly because we don't want to break compatibility too much in a
released branch, and partly because the clean coding requires
inheritance_planner to have applied partition pruning to a partitioned
target table, which it doesn't in v11. However, we can tweak things
enough to cover the missed case, which seems like a good idea since
it's potentially a performance regression from v10. This patch keeps
v11's previous behavior in which enable_partition_pruning overrides
constraint_exclusion for an inherited target table, though.
In HEAD, also teach relation_excluded_by_constraints that it's okay to use
inheritable constraints when trying to prune a traditional inheritance
tree. This might not be thought worthy of effort given that that feature
is semi-deprecated now, but we have enough infrastructure that it only
takes a couple more lines of code to do it correctly.
Amit Langote and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9813f079-f16b-61c8-9ab7-4363cab28d80@lab.ntt.co.jp
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/29069.1555970894@sss.pgh.pa.us
Before those commits, partitioning-related code in the executor could
assume that ModifyTableState.resultRelInfo[] contains only leaf partitions.
However, now a fully-pruned update results in a dummy ModifyTable that
references the root partitioned table, and that breaks some stuff.
In v11, this led to an assertion or core dump in the tuple routing code.
Fix by disabling tuple routing, since we don't need that anyway.
(I chose to do that in HEAD as well for safety, even though the problem
doesn't manifest in HEAD as it stands.)
In v10, this confused ExecInitModifyTable's decision about whether it
needed to close the root table. But we can get rid of that altogether
by being smarter about where to find the root table.
Note that since the referenced commits haven't shipped yet, this
isn't fixing any bug the field has seen.
Amit Langote, per a report from me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20710.1554582479@sss.pgh.pa.us
If we need ordered output from a scan of a partitioned table, but
the ordering matches the partition ordering, then we don't need to
use a MergeAppend to combine the pre-ordered per-partition scan
results: a plain Append will produce the same results. This
both saves useless comparison work inside the MergeAppend proper,
and allows us to start returning tuples after istarting up just
the first child node not all of them.
However, all is not peaches and cream, because if some of the
child nodes have high startup costs then there will be big
discontinuities in the tuples-returned-versus-elapsed-time curve.
The planner's cost model cannot handle that (yet, anyway).
If we model the Append's startup cost as being just the first
child's startup cost, we may drastically underestimate the cost
of fetching slightly more tuples than are available from the first
child. Since we've had bad experiences with over-optimistic choices
of "fast start" plans for ORDER BY LIMIT queries, that seems scary.
As a klugy workaround, set the startup cost estimate for an ordered
Append to be the sum of its children's startup costs (as MergeAppend
would). This doesn't really describe reality, but it's less likely
to cause a bad plan choice than an underestimated startup cost would.
In practice, the cases where we really care about this optimization
will have child plans that are IndexScans with zero startup cost,
so that the overly conservative estimate is still just zero.
David Rowley, reviewed by Julien Rouhaud and Antonin Houska
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f-hAqhPLRk_RaSFTgYxd=Tz5hA7kQ2h4-DhJufQk8TGuw@mail.gmail.com
The assertions added by commit b04aeb0a0 exposed that there are some
code paths wherein the executor will try to open an index without
holding any lock on it. We do have some lock on the index's table,
so it seems likely that there's no fatal problem with this (for
instance, the index couldn't get dropped from under us). Still,
it's bad practice and we should fix it.
To do so, remove the optimizations in ExecInitIndexScan and friends
that tried to avoid taking a lock on an index belonging to a target
relation, and just take the lock always. In non-bug cases, this
will result in no additional shared-memory access, since we'll find
in the local lock table that we already have a lock of the desired
type; hence, no significant performance degradation should occur.
Also, adjust the planner and executor so that the type of lock taken
on an index is always identical to the type of lock taken for its table,
by relying on the recently added RangeTblEntry.rellockmode field.
This avoids some corner cases where that might not have been true
before (possibly resulting in extra locking overhead), and prevents
future maintenance issues from having multiple bits of logic that
all needed to be in sync. In addition, this change removes all core
calls to ExecRelationIsTargetRelation, which avoids a possible O(N^2)
startup penalty for queries with large numbers of target relations.
(We'd probably remove that function altogether, were it not that we
advertise it as something that FDWs might want to use.)
Also adjust some places in selfuncs.c to not take any lock on indexes
they are transiently opening, since we can assume that plancat.c
did that already.
In passing, change gin_clean_pending_list() to take RowExclusiveLock
not AccessShareLock on its target index. Although it's not clear that
that's actually a bug, it seemed very strange for a function that's
explicitly going to modify the index to use only AccessShareLock.
David Rowley, reviewed by Julien Rouhaud and Amit Langote,
a bit of further tweaking by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/19465.1541636036@sss.pgh.pa.us
The upper-planner pathification allows FDWs to arrange to push down
different types of upper-stage operations to the remote side. This
commit teaches postgres_fdw to do it for the (FINAL, NULL) upperrel,
which is responsible for doing LockRows, LIMIT, and/or ModifyTable.
This provides the ability for postgres_fdw to handle SELECT commands
so that it 1) skips the LockRows step (if any) (note that this is
safe since it performs early locking) and 2) pushes down the LIMIT
and/or OFFSET restrictions (if any) to the remote side. This doesn't
handle the INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE cases.
Author: Etsuro Fujita
Reviewed-By: Antonin Houska and Jeff Janes
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87pnz1aby9.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
We can set this up once and for all in subquery_planner's initial survey
of the flattened rangetable, rather than incrementally adjusting it in
build_simple_rel. The previous approach made it rather hard to reason
about exactly when the value would be available, and we were definitely
using it in some places before the final value was computed.
Noted while fooling around with Amit Langote's patch to delay creation
of inheritance child rels. That didn't break this code, but it made it
even more fragile, IMO.
