tuple, instead of the former cpu_tuple_cost. It is sane to charge less than
cpu_tuple_cost because Materialize never does any qual-checking or projection,
so it's got less overhead than most plan node types. In particular, we want
to have the same charge here as is charged for readout in cost_sort. That
avoids the problem recently exhibited by Teodor wherein the planner prefers
a useless sort over a materialize step in a context where a lot of rescanning
will happen. The rescan costs should be just about the same for both node
types, so make their estimates the same.
Not back-patching because all of the current logic for rescan cost estimates
is new in 9.0. The old handling of rescans is sufficiently not-sane that
changing this in that structure is a bit pointless, and might indeed cause
regressions.
This patch allows the frame to start from CURRENT ROW (in either RANGE or
ROWS mode), and it also adds support for ROWS n PRECEDING and ROWS n FOLLOWING
start and end points. (RANGE value PRECEDING/FOLLOWING isn't there yet ---
the grammar works, but that's all.)
Hitoshi Harada, reviewed by Pavel Stehule
to be just a minor extension of the previous patch that made "x IS NULL"
indexable, because we can treat the IS NOT NULL condition as if it were
"x < NULL" or "x > NULL" (depending on the index's NULLS FIRST/LAST option),
just like IS NULL is treated like "x = NULL". Aside from any possible
usefulness in its own right, this is an important improvement for
index-optimized MAX/MIN aggregates: it is now reliably possible to get
a column's min or max value cheaply, even when there are a lot of nulls
cluttering the interesting end of the index.
and teach ANALYZE to compute such stats for tables that have subclasses.
Per my proposal of yesterday.
autovacuum still needs to be taught about running ANALYZE on parent tables
when their subclasses change, but the feature is useful even without that.
mergejoin to shield it from doing mark/restore and refetches. Put an explicit
flag in MergePath so we can centralize the logic that knows about this,
and add costing logic that considers using Materialize even when it's not
forced by the previously-existing considerations. This is in response to
a discussion back in August that suggested that materializing an inner
indexscan can be helpful when the refetch percentage is high enough.
a lot of strange behaviors that occurred in join cases. We now identify the
"current" row for every joined relation in UPDATE, DELETE, and SELECT FOR
UPDATE/SHARE queries. If an EvalPlanQual recheck is necessary, we jam the
appropriate row into each scan node in the rechecking plan, forcing it to emit
only that one row. The former behavior could rescan the whole of each joined
relation for each recheck, which was terrible for performance, and what's much
worse could result in duplicated output tuples.
Also, the original implementation of EvalPlanQual could not re-use the recheck
execution tree --- it had to go through a full executor init and shutdown for
every row to be tested. To avoid this overhead, I've associated a special
runtime Param with each LockRows or ModifyTable plan node, and arranged to
make every scan node below such a node depend on that Param. Thus, by
signaling a change in that Param, the EPQ machinery can just rescan the
already-built test plan.
This patch also adds a prohibition on set-returning functions in the
targetlist of SELECT FOR UPDATE/SHARE. This is needed to avoid the
duplicate-output-tuple problem. It seems fairly reasonable since the
other restrictions on SELECT FOR UPDATE are meant to ensure that there
is a unique correspondence between source tuples and result tuples,
which an output SRF destroys as much as anything else does.
execMain.c and into a new plan node type LockRows. Like the recent change
to put table updating into a ModifyTable plan node, this increases planning
flexibility by allowing the operations to occur below the top level of the
plan tree. It's necessary in any case to restore the previous behavior of
having FOR UPDATE locking occur before ModifyTable does.
This partially refactors EvalPlanQual to allow multiple rows-under-test
to be inserted into the EPQ machinery before starting an EPQ test query.
That isn't sufficient to fix EPQ's general bogosity in the face of plans
that return multiple rows per test row, though. Since this patch is
mostly about getting some plan node infrastructure in place and not about
fixing ten-year-old bugs, I will leave EPQ improvements for another day.
Another behavioral change that we could now think about is doing FOR UPDATE
before LIMIT, but that too seems like it should be treated as a followon
patch.
They are now handled by a new plan node type called ModifyTable, which is
placed at the top of the plan tree. In itself this change doesn't do much,
except perhaps make the handling of RETURNING lists and inherited UPDATEs a
tad less klugy. But it is necessary preparation for the intended extension of
allowing RETURNING queries inside WITH.
Marko Tiikkaja
is unique and is not referenced above the join. In this case the inner
side doesn't affect the query result and can be thrown away entirely.
Although perhaps nobody would ever write such a thing by hand, it's
a reasonably common case in machine-generated SQL.
The current implementation only recognizes the case where the inner side
is a simple relation with a unique index matching the query conditions.
This is enough for the use-cases that have been shown so far, but we
might want to try to handle other cases later.
Robert Haas, somewhat rewritten by Tom
an explicit model of rescan costs being different from first-time costs.
The costing of Material nodes in particular now has some visible relationship
to the actual runtime behavior, where before it was essentially fantasy.
This also fixes up a couple of places where different materialized plan types
were treated differently for no very good reason (probably just oversights).
A couple of the regression tests are affected, because the planner now chooses
to put the other relation on the inside of a nestloop-with-materialize.
So far as I can see both changes are sane, and the planner is now more
consistently following the expectation that it should prefer to materialize
the smaller of two relations.
Per a recent discussion with Robert Haas.
that the sanity checking I added to create_mergejoin_plan() in 8.3 was a
few bricks shy of a load: the mergeclauses could reference pathkeys in a
noncanonical order such as x,y,x, not only cases like x,x,y which is all
that the code had allowed for. The odd cases only turn up when using
redundant clauses in an outer join condition, which is why no one had
noticed before.
joins a bit better, ie, understand the differing cost functions for matched
and unmatched outer tuples. There is more that could be done in cost_hashjoin
but this already helps a great deal. Per discussions with Robert Haas.
Stefan Kaltenbrunner. The most reasonable behavior (at least for the near
term) seems to be to ignore the PlaceHolderVar and examine its argument
instead. In support of this, change the API of pull_var_clause() to allow
callers to request recursion into PlaceHolderVars. Currently
estimate_num_groups() is the only customer for that behavior, but where
there's one there may be others.
"physical tlist" optimization on the outer relation (ie, force a projection
step to occur in its scan). This avoids storing useless column values when
the outer relation's tuples are written to temporary batch files.
Modified version of a patch by Michael Henderson and Ramon Lawrence.
distribution, by creating a special fast path for the (first few) most common
values of the outer relation. Tuples having hashvalues matching the MCVs
are effectively forced to be in the first batch, so that we never write
them out to the batch temp files.
Bryce Cutt and Ramon Lawrence, with some editorialization by me.
patch. This includes the ability to force the frame to cover the whole
partition, and the ability to make the frame end exactly on the current row
rather than its last ORDER BY peer. Supporting any more of the full SQL
frame-clause syntax will require nontrivial hacking on the window aggregate
code, so it'll have to wait for 8.5 or beyond.
as LIKE. I oversimplified this code when removing support for plan-time
determination of index operator lossiness back in April --- I had thought
create_bitmap_subplan could stop returning two separate lists of qual
conditions, but it still must so that we can treat special operators
correctly in create_bitmap_scan_plan. Per report from Rushabh Lathia.
that represent some expression that we desire to compute below the top level
of the plan, and then let that value "bubble up" as though it were a plain
Var (ie, a column value).
The immediate application is to allow sub-selects to be flattened even when
they are below an outer join and have non-nullable output expressions.
Formerly we couldn't flatten because such an expression wouldn't properly
go to NULL when evaluated above the outer join. Now, we wrap it in a
PlaceHolderVar and arrange for the actual evaluation to occur below the outer
join. When the resulting Var bubbles up through the join, it will be set to
NULL if necessary, yielding the correct results. This fixes a planner
limitation that's existed since 7.1.
In future we might want to use this mechanism to re-introduce some form of
Hellerstein's "expensive functions" optimization, ie place the evaluation of
an expensive function at the most suitable point in the plan tree.
implementation uses an in-memory hash table, so it will poop out for very
large recursive results ... but the performance characteristics of a
sort-based implementation would be pretty unpleasant too.
There are some unimplemented aspects: recursive queries must use UNION ALL
(should allow UNION too), and we don't have SEARCH or CYCLE clauses.
These might or might not get done for 8.4, but even without them it's a
pretty useful feature.
There are also a couple of small loose ends and definitional quibbles,
which I'll send a memo about to pgsql-hackers shortly. But let's land
the patch now so we can get on with other development.
Yoshiyuki Asaba, with lots of help from Tatsuo Ishii and Tom Lane
inserting a materialize node above an inner-side sort node, when the sort is
expected to spill to disk. (The materialize protects the sort from having
to support mark/restore, allowing it to do its final merge pass on-the-fly.)
We neglected to teach cost_mergejoin about that hack, so it was failing to
include the materialize's costs in the estimated cost of the mergejoin.
The materialize's costs are generally going to be pretty negligible in
comparison to the sort's, so this is only a small error and probably not
worth back-patching; but it's still wrong.
In the similar case where a materialize is inserted to protect an inner-side
node that can't do mark/restore at all, it's still true that the materialize
should not spill to disk, and so we should cost it cheaply rather than
expensively.
Noted while thinking about a question from Tom Raney.
most node types used in expression trees (both before and after parse
analysis). This allows us to place an error cursor in many situations
where we formerly could not, because the information wasn't available
beyond the very first level of parse analysis. There's a fair amount
of work still to be done to persuade individual ereport() calls to actually
include an error location, but this gets the initdb-forcing part of the
work out of the way; and the situation is already markedly better than
before for complaints about unimplementable implicit casts, such as
CASE and UNION constructs with incompatible alternative data types.
Per my proposal of a few days ago.
into nodes/nodeFuncs, so as to reduce wanton cross-subsystem #includes inside
the backend. There's probably more that should be done along this line,
but this is a start anyway.
the old JOIN_IN code, but antijoins are new functionality.) Teach the planner
to convert appropriate EXISTS and NOT EXISTS subqueries into semi and anti
joins respectively. Also, LEFT JOINs with suitable upper-level IS NULL
filters are recognized as being anti joins. Unify the InClauseInfo and
OuterJoinInfo infrastructure into "SpecialJoinInfo". With that change,
it becomes possible to associate a SpecialJoinInfo with every join attempt,
which permits some cleanup of join selectivity estimation. That needs to be
taken much further than this patch does, but the next step is to change the
API for oprjoin selectivity functions, which seems like material for a
separate patch. So for the moment the output size estimates for semi and
especially anti joins are quite bogus.
hashtable entries for tuples that are found only in the second input: they
can never contribute to the output. Furthermore, this implies that the
planner should endeavor to put first the smaller (in number of groups) input
relation for an INTERSECT. Implement that, and upgrade prepunion's estimation
of the number of rows returned by setops so that there's some amount of sanity
in the estimate of which one is smaller.
This completes my project of improving usage of hashing for duplicate
elimination (aggregate functions with DISTINCT remain undone, but that's
for some other day).
As with the previous patches, this means we can INTERSECT/EXCEPT on datatypes
that can hash but not sort, and it means that INTERSECT/EXCEPT without ORDER
BY are no longer certain to produce sorted output.
as per my recent proposal:
1. Fold SortClause and GroupClause into a single node type SortGroupClause.
We were already relying on them to be struct-equivalent, so using two node
tags wasn't accomplishing much except to get in the way of comparing items
with equal().
2. Add an "eqop" field to SortGroupClause to carry the associated equality
operator. This is cheap for the parser to get at the same time it's looking
up the sort operator, and storing it eliminates the need for repeated
not-so-cheap lookups during planning. In future this will also let us
represent GROUP/DISTINCT operations on datatypes that have hash opclasses
but no btree opclasses (ie, they have equality but no natural sort order).
The previous representation simply didn't work for that, since its only
indicator of comparison semantics was a sort operator.
3. Add a hasDistinctOn boolean to struct Query to explicitly record whether
the distinctClause came from DISTINCT or DISTINCT ON. This allows removing
some complicated and not 100% bulletproof code that attempted to figure
that out from the distinctClause alone.
This patch doesn't in itself create any new capability, but it's necessary
infrastructure for future attempts to use hash-based grouping for DISTINCT
and UNION/INTERSECT/EXCEPT.
taking the maximum of any child rel's width, we should weight the widths
proportionally to the number of rows expected from each child. In hindsight
this is obviously correct because row width is really a proxy for the total
physical size of the relation. Per discussion with Scott Carey (bug #4264).
we had several code paths where a physical tlist could be used for the input
to a Sort node, which is a dumb idea because any unneeded table columns will
increase the volume of data the sort has to push around.
(Unfortunately the easy-looking fix of calling disuse_physical_tlist during
make_sort_xxx doesn't work because in most cases we're already committed to
the current input tlist --- it's been marked with sort column numbers, or
we've built grouping column numbers using it, etc. The tlist has to be
selected properly at the calling level before we start constructing sort-col
information. This is easy enough to do, we were just failing to take the
point into consideration.)
Back-patch to 8.3. I believe the problem probably exists clear back to 7.4
when the physical tlist optimization was added, but I'm afraid to back-patch
further than 8.3 without a great deal more study than I want to put into it.
The code in this area has drifted a lot over time. The real-world importance
of these code paths is uncertain anyway --- I think in many cases we'd
probably prefer hash-based methods.
no particular need to do get_op_opfamily_properties() while building an
indexscan plan. Postpone that lookup until executor start. This simplifies
createplan.c a lot more than it complicates nodeIndexscan.c, and makes things
more uniform since we already had to do it that way for RowCompare
expressions. Should be a bit faster too, at least for plans that aren't
re-used many times, since we avoid palloc'ing and perhaps copying the
intermediate list data structure.
instead of plan time. Extend the amgettuple API so that the index AM returns
a boolean indicating whether the indexquals need to be rechecked, and make
that rechecking happen in nodeIndexscan.c (currently the only place where
it's expected to be needed; other callers of index_getnext are just erroring
out for now). For the moment, GIN and GIST have stub logic that just always
sets the recheck flag to TRUE --- I'm hoping to get Teodor to handle pushing
that control down to the opclass consistent() functions. The planner no
longer pays any attention to amopreqcheck, and that catalog column will go
away in due course.
predictable manner; in particular that if you say ORDER BY output-column-ref,
it will in fact sort by that specific column even if there are multiple
syntactic matches. An example is
SELECT random() AS a, random() AS b FROM ... ORDER BY b, a;
While the use-case for this might be a bit debatable, it worked as expected
in earlier releases, so we should preserve the behavior for 8.3. Per my
recent proposal.
While at it, fix convert_subquery_pathkeys() to handle RelabelType stripping
in both directions; it needs this for the same reasons make_sort_from_pathkeys
does.
to be able to discard top-level RelabelType nodes on *both* sides of the
equivalence-class-to-target-list comparison, since make_pathkey_from_sortinfo
might either add or remove a RelabelType. Also fix the latter to do the
removal case cleanly. Per example from Peter.
RelabelType nodes when the sort key is binary-compatible with the sort
operator rather than having exactly its input type. We did this correctly
for index columns but not sort keys, leading to failure to notice that
a varchar index matches an ORDER BY request. This requires a bit more work
in make_sort_from_pathkeys, but not anyplace else that I can find.
Per bug report and subsequent discussion.
is using mark/restore but not rewind or backward-scan capability. Insert a
materialize plan node between a mergejoin and its inner child if the inner
child is a sort that is expected to spill to disk. The materialize shields
the sort from the need to do mark/restore and thereby allows it to perform
its final merge pass on-the-fly; while the materialize itself is normally
cheap since it won't spill to disk unless the number of tuples with equal
key values exceeds work_mem.
Greg Stark, with some kibitzing from Tom Lane.
need be returned. We keep a heap of the current best N tuples and sift-up
new tuples into it as we scan the input. For M input tuples this means
only about M*log(N) comparisons instead of M*log(M), not to mention a lot
less workspace when N is small --- avoiding spill-to-disk for large M
is actually the most attractive thing about it. Patch includes planner
and executor support for invoking this facility in ORDER BY ... LIMIT
queries. Greg Stark, with some editorialization by moi.
are mostly excluded by constraints: do the CE test a bit earlier to save
some adjust_appendrel_attrs() work on excluded children, and arrange to
use array indexing rather than rt_fetch() to fetch RTEs in the main body
of the planner. The latter is something I'd wanted to do for awhile anyway,
but seeing list_nth_cell() as 35% of the runtime gets one's attention.
is still needed despite cleanups in setrefs.c, because the point is to
let the inserted Result node compute a different tlist than its input
node does. Per example from Jeremy Drake.
useless substructure for its RangeTblEntry nodes. (I chose to keep using the
same struct node type and just zero out the link fields for unneeded info,
rather than making a separate ExecRangeTblEntry type --- it seemed too
fragile to have two different rangetable representations.)
Along the way, put subplans into a list in the toplevel PlannedStmt node,
and have SubPlan nodes refer to them by list index instead of direct pointers.
Vadim wanted to do that years ago, but I never understood what he was on about
until now. It makes things a *whole* lot more robust, because we can stop
worrying about duplicate processing of subplans during expression tree
traversals. That's been a constant source of bugs, and it's finally gone.
There are some consequent simplifications yet to be made, like not using
a separate EState for subplans in the executor, but I'll tackle that later.
plan nodes, so that the executor does not need to get these items from
the range table at runtime. This will avoid needing to include these
fields in the compact range table I'm expecting to make the executor use.
Hashing for aggregation purposes still needs work, so it's not time to
mark any cross-type operators as hashable for general use, but these cases
work if the operators are so marked by hand in the system catalogs.
