generate_useful_gather_paths used to skip unsorted paths (without any
pathkeys), but that is unnecessary - the later code actually can handle
such paths just fine by adding a Sort node. This is clearly a thinko,
preventing construction of useful plans.
Backpatch to 13, where Incremental Sort was introduced.
Author: James Coleman
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra
Backpatch-through: 13
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAaqYe8cK3g5CfLC4w7bs=hC0mSksZC=H5M8LSchj5e5OxpTAg@mail.gmail.com
array_get_element and array_get_slice qualify as leakproof, since
they will silently return NULL for bogus subscripts. But
array_set_element and array_set_slice throw errors for such cases,
making them clearly not leakproof. contain_leaked_vars was evidently
written with only the former case in mind, as it gave the wrong answer
for assignment SubscriptingRefs (nee ArrayRefs).
This would be a live security bug, were it not that assignment
SubscriptingRefs can only occur in INSERT and UPDATE target lists,
while we only care about leakproofness for qual expressions; so the
wrong answer can't occur in practice. Still, that's a rather shaky
answer for a security-related question; and maybe in future somebody
will want to ask about leakproofness of a tlist. So it seems wise to
fix and even back-patch this correction.
(We would need some change here anyway for the upcoming
generic-subscripting patch, since extensions might make different
tradeoffs about whether to throw errors. Commit 558d77f20 attempted
to lay groundwork for that by asking check_functions_in_node whether a
SubscriptingRef contains leaky functions; but that idea fails now that
the implementation methods of a SubscriptingRef are not SQL-visible
functions that could be marked leakproof or not.)
Back-patch to 9.6. While 9.5 has the same issue, the code's a bit
different. It seems quite unlikely that we'd introduce any actual bug
in the short time 9.5 has left to live, so the work/risk/reward balance
isn't attractive for changing 9.5.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3143742.1607368115@sss.pgh.pa.us
Commit 4be058fe9 forgot that the append_rel_list would already be
populated at the time we remove useless result RTEs, and it might contain
PlaceHolderVars that need to be adjusted like the ones in the main parse
tree. This could lead to "no relation entry for relid N" failures later
on, when the planner tries to do something with an unadjusted PHV.
Per report from Tom Ellis. Back-patch to v12 where the bug came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20201205173056.GF30712@cloudinit-builder
For debugging purposes, Path nodes are supposed to have outfuncs
support, but this was overlooked in the original incremental sort patch.
While at it, clean up a couple other minor oversights, as well as
bizarre choice of return type for create_incremental_sort_path().
(All the existing callers just cast it to "Path *" immediately, so
they don't care, but some future caller might care.)
outfuncs.c fix by Zhijie Hou, the rest by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/324c4d81d8134117972a5b1f6cdf9560@G08CNEXMBPEKD05.g08.fujitsu.local
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
If a PlaceHolderVar is to be evaluated at a join relation, but
its value is only needed there and not at higher levels, we neglected
to update the joinrel's direct_lateral_relids to include the PHV's
source rel. This causes problems because join_is_legal() then won't
allow joining the joinrel to the PHV's source rel at all, leading
to "failed to build any N-way joins" planner failures.
Per report from Andreas Seltenreich. Back-patch to 9.5
where the problem originated.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87blfgqa4t.fsf@aurora.ydns.eu
Previously this code assumed that all IndexScan nodes supported
mark/restore, which is not true since it depends on optional index AM
support functions. This could lead to errors about missing support
functions in rare edge cases of mergejoins with no sort keys, where an
unordered non-btree index scan was placed on the inner path without a
protecting Materialize node. (Normally, the fact that merge join
requires ordered input would avoid this error.)
Backpatch all the way since this bug is ancient.
Per report from Eugen Konkov on irc.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87o8jn50be.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
When considering Incremental Sort below a Gather Merge, we need to be
a bit more careful when matching pathkeys to EC members. It's not enough
to find a member whose Vars are all in the current relation's target;
volatile expressions in particular need to be contained in the target,
otherwise it's too early to use the pathkey.
Reported-by: Jaime Casanova
Author: James Coleman
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra
Backpatch-through: 13, where the incremental sort code was added
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJGNTeNaxpXgBVcRhJX%2B2vSbq%2BF2kJqGBcvompmpvXb7pq%2BoFA%40mail.gmail.com
It's unsafe to do this at parse time because addition of generated
columns to a table would not invalidate stored rules containing
UPDATEs on the table ... but there might now be dependent generated
columns that were not there when the rule was made. This also fixes
an oversight that rewriteTargetView failed to update extraUpdatedCols
when transforming an UPDATE on an updatable view. (Since the new
calculation is downstream of that, rewriteTargetView doesn't actually
need to do anything; but before, there was a demonstrable bug there.)
In v13 and HEAD, this leads to easily-visible bugs because (since
commit c6679e4fc) we won't recalculate generated columns that aren't
listed in extraUpdatedCols. In v12 this bitmap is mostly just used
for trigger-firing decisions, so you'd only notice a problem if a
trigger cared whether a generated column had been updated.
I'd complained about this back in May, but then forgot about it
until bug #16671 from Michael Paul Killian revived the issue.
Back-patch to v12 where this field was introduced. If existing
stored rules contain any extraUpdatedCols values, they'll be
ignored because the rewriter will overwrite them, so the bug will
be fixed even for existing rules. (But note that if someone were
to update to 13.1 or 12.5, store some rules with UPDATEs on tables
having generated columns, and then downgrade to a prior minor version,
they might observe issues similar to what this patch fixes. That
seems unlikely enough to not be worth going to a lot of effort to fix.)
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/10206.1588964727@sss.pgh.pa.us
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16671-2fa55851859fb166@postgresql.org
Since commit 913bbd88d, check_sql_fn_retval() can either insert type
coercion steps in-line in the Query that produces the SQL function's
results, or generate a new top-level Query to perform the coercions,
if modifying the Query's output in-place wouldn't be safe. However,
it appears that the latter case has never actually worked, because
the code tried to inject the new Query back into the query list it was
passed ... which is not the list that will be used for later processing
when we execute the SQL function "normally" (without inlining it).
So we ended up with no coercion happening at run-time, leading to
wrong results or crashes depending on the datatypes involved.
While the regression tests look like they cover this area well enough,
through a huge bit of bad luck all the test cases that exercise the
separate-Query path were checking either inline-able cases (which
accidentally didn't have the bug) or cases that are no-ops at runtime
(e.g., varchar to text), so that the failure to perform the coercion
wasn't obvious. The fact that the cases that don't work weren't
allowed at all before v13 probably contributed to not noticing the
problem sooner, too.
To fix, get rid of the separate "flat" list of Query nodes and instead
pass the real two-level list that is going to be used later. I chose
to make the same change in check_sql_fn_statements(), although that has
no actual bug, just so that we don't need that data structure at all.
This is an API change, as evidenced by the adjustments needed to
callers outside functions.c. That's a bit scary to be doing in a
released branch, but so far as I can tell from a quick search,
there are no outside callers of these functions (and they are
sufficiently specific to our semantics for SQL-language functions that
it's not apparent why any extension would need to call them). In any
case, v13 already changed the API of check_sql_fn_retval() compared to
prior branches.
Per report from pinker. Back-patch to v13 where this code came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1603050466566-0.post@n3.nabble.com
In the planner, it was possible, given an extreme enough case containing a
large number of joins for the number of estimated rows to become infinite.
This could cause problems in initial_cost_mergejoin() where we perform
some calculations based on those row estimates.
A problem case, presented by Onder Kalaci showed an Assert failure from
an Assert checking outerstartsel <= outerendsel. In his test case this
was effectively NaN <= Inf, which is false. The NaN outerstartsel came
from multiplying the infinite outer_path_rows by 0.0.
In master, this problem was fixed by a90c950fc, however, that fix was too
invasive for the backbranches. Here we just relax the Asserts to allow
them to pass. The worst that appears to happen from this is that we show
NaN cost values and infinite row estimates in EXPLAIN. add_path() would
have had a hard time doing anything useful with such costs, but that does
not really matter as if the row estimates were even close to accurate,
such plan would not complete this side of the heat death of the universe.
Reported-by: Onder Kalaci
Backpatch: 9.5 to 13
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/DM6PR21MB1211FF360183BCA901B27F04D80B0@DM6PR21MB1211.namprd21.prod.outlook.com
This patch prevents crashes or wrong plans when partition-wise joins
are considered during GEQO planning, as a consequence of the
EquivalenceClass data structures becoming corrupt after a GEQO
context reset.
A remaining problem is that successive GEQO cycles will make multiple
copies of the required EC members, since add_child_join_rel_equivalences
has no idea that such members might exist already. For now we'll just
live with that. The lack of field complaints of crashes suggests that
this is a mighty little-used situation.
Back-patch to v12 where this code was introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1683100.1601860653@sss.pgh.pa.us
get_eclass_for_sort_expr() computes expr_relids and nullable_relids
early on, even though they won't be needed unless we make a new
EquivalenceClass, which we often don't. Aside from the probably-minor
inefficiency, there's a memory management problem: these bitmapsets will
be built in the caller's context, leading to dangling pointers if that
is shorter-lived than root->planner_cxt. This would be a live bug if
get_eclass_for_sort_expr() could be called with create_it = true during
GEQO join planning. So far as I can find, the core code never does
that, but it's hard to be sure that no extensions do, especially since
the comments make it clear that that's supposed to be a supported case.
Fix by not computing these values until we've switched into planner_cxt
to build the new EquivalenceClass.
generate_join_implied_equalities() uses inner_rel->relids to look up
relevant eclasses, but it ought to be using nominal_inner_relids.
This is presently harmless because a child RelOptInfo will always have
exactly the same eclass_indexes as its topmost parent; but that might
not be true forever, and anyway it makes the code confusing.
The first of these is old (introduced by me in f3b3b8d5b), so back-patch
to all supported branches. The second only dates to v13, but we might
as well back-patch it to keep the code looking similar across branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1508010.1601832581@sss.pgh.pa.us
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
Tomas Vondra observed that the IO behavior for HashAgg tends to be
worse than for Sort. Penalize HashAgg IO costs accordingly.
Also, account for the CPU effort of spilling the tuples and reading
them back.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200906212112.nzoy5ytrzjjodpfh@development
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra
Backpatch-through: 13
The trouble with doing this is that an apparently-constant subquery
output column isn't really constant if it is a grouping column that
appears in only some of the grouping sets. A qual using such a
column would be subject to incorrect const-folding after push-down,
as seen in bug #16585 from Paul Sivash.
To fix, just disable qual pushdown altogether if the sub-query has
nonempty groupingSets. While we could imagine far less restrictive
solutions, there is not much point in working harder right now,
because subquery_planner() won't move HAVING clauses to WHERE within
such a subquery. If the qual stays in HAVING it's not going to be
a lot more useful than if we'd kept it at the outer level.
Having said that, this restriction could be removed if we used a
parsetree representation that distinguished such outputs from actual
constants, which is something I hope to do in future. Hence, make
the patch a minimal addition rather than integrating it more tightly
(e.g. by renumbering the existing items in subquery_is_pushdown_safe's
comment).
Back-patch to 9.5 where grouping sets were introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16585-9d8c340d23ade8c1@postgresql.org
Commit a477bfc1d fixed eval_const_expressions() to ensure that it
didn't generate unnecessary RelabelType nodes, but I failed to notice
that some other places in the planner had the same issue. Really
noplace in the planner should be using plain makeRelabelType(), for
fear of generating expressions that should be equal() to semantically
equivalent trees, but aren't.
An example is that because canonicalize_ec_expression() failed
to be careful about this, we could end up with an equivalence class
containing both a plain Const, and a Const-with-RelabelType
representing exactly the same value. So far as I can tell this led to
no visible misbehavior, but we did waste a bunch of cycles generating
and evaluating "Const = Const-with-RelabelType" to prove such entries
are redundant.
Hence, move the support function added by a477bfc1d to where it can
be more generally useful, and use it in the places where planner code
previously used makeRelabelType.
Back-patch to v12, like the previous patch. While I have no concrete
evidence of any real misbehavior here, it's certainly possible that
I overlooked a case where equivalent expressions that aren't equal()
could cause a user-visible problem. In any case carrying extra
RelabelType nodes through planning to execution isn't very desirable.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1311836.1597781384@sss.pgh.pa.us
nodeSubplan.c expects that the testexpr for a hashable ANY SubPlan
has the form of one or more OpExprs whose LHS is an expression of the
outer query's, while the RHS is an expression over Params representing
output columns of the subquery. However, the planner only went as far
as verifying that the clauses were all binary OpExprs. This works
99.99% of the time, because the clauses have the right shape when
emitted by the parser --- but it's possible for function inlining to
break that, as reported by PegoraroF10. To fix, teach the planner
to check that the LHS and RHS contain the right things, or more
accurately don't contain the wrong things. Given that this has been
broken for years without anyone noticing, it seems sufficient to just
give up hashing when it happens, rather than go to the trouble of
commuting the clauses back again (which wouldn't necessarily work
anyway).
While poking at that, I also noticed that nodeSubplan.c had a baked-in
assumption that the number of hash clauses is identical to the number
of subquery output columns. Again, that's fine as far as parser output
goes, but it's not hard to break it via function inlining. There seems
little reason for that assumption though --- AFAICS, the only thing
it's buying us is not having to store the number of hash clauses
explicitly. Adding code to the planner to reject such cases would take
more code than getting nodeSubplan.c to cope, so I fixed it that way.
This has been broken for as long as we've had hashable SubPlans,
so back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1549209182255-0.post@n3.nabble.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.
reparameterize_path_by_child() failed to reparameterize BitmapAnd
and BitmapOr paths. This matters only if such a path is chosen as
the inside of a nestloop partition-wise join, where we have to pass
in parameters from the outside of the nestloop. If that did happen,
we generated a bad plan that would likely lead to crashes at execution.
This is not entirely reparameterize_path_by_child()'s fault though;
it's the victim of an ancient decision (my ancient decision, I think)
to not bother filling in param_info in BitmapAnd/Or path nodes. That
caused the function to believe that such nodes and their children
contain no parameter references and so need not be processed.
In hindsight that decision looks pretty penny-wise and pound-foolish:
while it saves a few cycles during path node setup, we do commonly
need the information later. In particular, by reversing the decision
and requiring valid param_info data in all nodes of a bitmap path
tree, we can get rid of indxpath.c's get_bitmap_tree_required_outer()
function, which computed the data on-demand. It's not unlikely that
that nets out as a savings of cycles in many scenarios. A couple
of other things in indxpath.c can be simplified as well.
While here, get rid of some cases in reparameterize_path_by_child()
that are visibly dead or useless, given that we only care about
reparameterizing paths that can be on the inside of a parameterized
nestloop. This case reminds one of the maxim that untested code
probably does not work, so I'm unwilling to leave unreachable code
in this function. (I did leave the T_Gather case in place even
though it's not reached in the regression tests. It's not very
clear to me when the planner might prefer to put Gather below
rather than above a nestloop, but at least in principle the case
might be interesting.)
Per bug #16536, originally from Arne Roland but with a test case
by Andrew Gierth. Back-patch to v11 where this code came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16536-2213ee0b3aad41fd@postgresql.org
The qual pushdown logic assumed that all Vars in a restriction clause
must be Vars referencing subquery outputs; but since we introduced
LATERAL, it's possible for such a Var to be a lateral reference instead.
This led to an assertion failure in debug builds. In a non-debug
build, there might be no ill effects (if qual_is_pushdown_safe decided
the qual was unsafe anyway), or we could get failures later due to
construction of an invalid plan. I've not gone to much length to
characterize the possible failures, but at least segfaults in the
executor have been observed.
Given that this has been busted since 9.3 and it took this long for
anybody to notice, I judge that the case isn't worth going to great
lengths to optimize. Hence, fix by just teaching qual_is_pushdown_safe
that such quals are unsafe to push down, matching the previous behavior
when it accidentally didn't fail.
Per report from Tom Ellis. Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200713175124.GQ8220@cloudinit-builder
This reverts commit 4cad2534da6d17067d98cf04be2dfc1bda8f2cd0 due to a
performance regression. It will be replaced by a new approach in an
upcoming commit.
Reported-by: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200614181418.mx4bvljmfkkhoqzl@alap3.anarazel.de
Backpatch-through: 13
After running GetForeignRelSize for a foreign table, adjust rel->tuples
to be at least as large as rel->rows. This prevents bizarre behavior
in estimate_num_groups() and perhaps other places, especially in the
scenario where rel->tuples is zero because pg_class.reltuples is
(suggesting that ANALYZE has never been run for the table). As things
stood, we'd end up estimating one group out of any GROUP BY on such a
table, whereas the default group-count estimate is more likely to result
in a sane plan.
Also, clarify in the documentation that GetForeignRelSize has the option
to override the rel->tuples value if it has a better idea of what to use
than what is in pg_class.reltuples.
Per report from Jeff Janes. Back-patch to all supported branches.
Patch by me; thanks to Etsuro Fujita for review
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMkU=1xNo9cnan+Npxgz0eK7394xmjmKg-QEm8wYG9P5-CcaqQ@mail.gmail.com
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
Commit 1f39bce021 added disk-based hash aggregation, which may spill
incoming tuples to disk. It however did not request projection to make
the tuples as narrow as possible, which may mean having to spill much
more data than necessary (increasing I/O, pushing other stuff from page
cache, etc.).
This adds CP_SMALL_TLIST in places that may use hash aggregation - we do
that only for AGG_HASHED. It's unnecessary for AGG_SORTED, because that
either uses explicit Sort (which already does projection) or pre-sorted
input (which does not need spilling to disk).
Author: Tomas Vondra
Reviewed-by: Jeff Davis
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200519151202.u2p2gpiawoaznsv2%40development
The previous indentation of optimizer functions was unclear; adjust the
indentation dashes so that a deeper level of indentation indicates that
the outer optimizer function calls the inner one.
Author: Richard Guo, with additional change by me
Reviewed-by: Kyotaro Horiguchi
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMbWs4-U-ogzpchGsP2BBMufCss1hktm%2B%2BeTJK_dUC196pw0cQ%40mail.gmail.com
Thomas Munro fixed a longstanding annoyance in pg_bsd_indent, that
it would misformat lines containing IsA() macros on the assumption
that the IsA() call should be treated like a cast. This improves
some other cases involving field/variable names that match typedefs,
too. The only places that get worse are a couple of uses of the
OpenSSL macro STACK_OF(); we'll gladly take that trade-off.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200114221814.GA19630@alvherre.pgsql
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
Writing a trailing semicolon in a macro is almost never the right thing,
because you almost always want to write a semicolon after each macro
call instead. (Even if there was some reason to prefer not to, pgindent
would probably make a hash of code formatted that way; so within PG the
rule should basically be "don't do it".) Thus, if we have a semi inside
the macro, the compiler sees "something;;". Much of the time the extra
empty statement is harmless, but it could lead to mysterious syntax
errors at call sites. In perhaps an overabundance of neatnik-ism, let's
run around and get rid of the excess semicolons whereever possible.
The only thing worse than a mysterious syntax error is a mysterious
syntax error that only happens in the back branches; therefore,
backpatch these changes where relevant, which is most of them because
most of these mistakes are old. (The lack of reported problems shows
that this is largely a hypothetical issue, but still, it could bite
us in some future patch.)
John Naylor and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CACPNZCs0qWTqJ2QUSGJ07B7uvAvzMb-KbG2q+oo+J3tsWN5cqw@mail.gmail.com
When estimating the number of pre-sorted groups in cost_incremental_sort
we must not pass Vars with varno 0 to estimate_num_groups, which would
cause failues in find_base_rel. This may happen when sorting output of
set operations, thanks to generate_append_tlist.
Unlike recurse_set_operations we can't easily access the original target
list, so if we find any Vars with varno 0, we fall back to the default
estimate DEFAULT_NUM_DISTINCT.
Reported-by: Justin Pryzby
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200411214639.GK2228%40telsasoft.com
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
This case didn't work because columns merged by FULL JOIN USING are
represented in the parse tree by COALESCE expressions, and the logic
for recognizing a partitionable join failed to match upper-level join
clauses to such expressions. To fix, synthesize suitable COALESCE
expressions and add them to the nullable_partexprs lists. This is
pretty ugly and brute-force, but it gets the job done. (I have
ambitions of rethinking the way outer-join output Vars are
represented, so maybe that will provide a cleaner solution someday.
For now, do this.)
Amit Langote, reviewed by Justin Pryzby, Richard Guo, and myself
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqG2WVUGmLJqtR0tPFhniO=H=9qQ+Z3L_ZC+Y3-EVQHFGg@mail.gmail.com
Previously, the partitionwise join technique only allowed partitionwise
join when input partitioned tables had exactly the same partition
bounds. This commit extends the technique to some cases when the tables
have different partition bounds, by using an advanced partition-matching
algorithm introduced by this commit. For both the input partitioned
tables, the algorithm checks whether every partition of one input
partitioned table only matches one partition of the other input
partitioned table at most, and vice versa. In such a case the join
between the tables can be broken down into joins between the matching
partitions, so the algorithm produces the pairs of the matching
partitions, plus the partition bounds for the join relation, to allow
partitionwise join for computing the join. Currently, the algorithm
works for list-partitioned and range-partitioned tables, but not
hash-partitioned tables. See comments in partition_bounds_merge().
Ashutosh Bapat and Etsuro Fujita, most of regression tests by Rajkumar
Raghuwanshi, some of the tests by Mark Dilger and Amul Sul, reviewed by
Dmitry Dolgov and Amul Sul, with additional review at various points by
Ashutosh Bapat, Mark Dilger, Robert Haas, Antonin Houska, Amit Langote,
Justin Pryzby, and Tomas Vondra
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFjFpRdjQvaUEV5DJX3TW6pU5eq54NCkadtxHX2JiJG_GvbrCA@mail.gmail.com
WITH TIES is an option to the FETCH FIRST N ROWS clause (the SQL
standard's spelling of LIMIT), where you additionally get rows that
compare equal to the last of those N rows by the columns in the
mandatory ORDER BY clause.
There was a proposal by Andrew Gierth to implement this functionality in
a more powerful way that would yield more features, but the other patch
had not been finished at this time, so we decided to use this one for
now in the spirit of incremental development.
Author: Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CALAY4q9ky7rD_A4vf=FVQvCGngm3LOes-ky0J6euMrg=_Se+ag@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87o8wvz253.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
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
Move have_partkey_equi_join and match_expr_to_partition_keys to
relnode.c, since they're used only there. Refactor
build_joinrel_partition_info to split out the code that fills the
joinrel's partition key lists; this doesn't have any non-cosmetic
impact, but it seems like a useful separation of concerns.
Improve assorted nearby comments.
Amit Langote, with a little further editorialization by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqG2WVUGmLJqtR0tPFhniO=H=9qQ+Z3L_ZC+Y3-EVQHFGg@mail.gmail.com
PostgreSQL provides set of template index access methods, where opclasses have
much freedom in the semantics of indexing. These index AMs are GiST, GIN,
SP-GiST and BRIN. There opclasses define representation of keys, operations on
them and supported search strategies. So, it's natural that opclasses may be
faced some tradeoffs, which require user-side decision. This commit implements
opclass parameters allowing users to set some values, which tell opclass how to
index the particular dataset.
This commit doesn't introduce new storage in system catalog. Instead it uses
pg_attribute.attoptions, which is used for table column storage options but
unused for index attributes.
In order to evade changing signature of each opclass support function, we
implement unified way to pass options to opclass support functions. Options
are set to fn_expr as the constant bytea expression. It's possible due to the
fact that opclass support functions are executed outside of expressions, so
fn_expr is unused for them.
This commit comes with some examples of opclass options usage. We parametrize
signature length in GiST. That applies to multiple opclasses: tsvector_ops,
gist__intbig_ops, gist_ltree_ops, gist__ltree_ops, gist_trgm_ops and
gist_hstore_ops. Also we parametrize maximum number of integer ranges for
gist__int_ops. However, the main future usage of this feature is expected
to be json, where users would be able to specify which way to index particular
json parts.
Catversion is bumped.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/d22c3a18-31c7-1879-fc11-4c1ce2f5e5af%40postgrespro.ru
Author: Nikita Glukhov, revised by me
Reviwed-by: Nikolay Shaplov, Robert Haas, Tom Lane, Tomas Vondra, Alvaro Herrera
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
