summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/backend/executor/execParallel.c
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2020-04-06Implement Incremental SortTomas Vondra
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
2020-04-04Add infrastructure to track WAL usage.Amit Kapila
This allows gathering the WAL generation statistics for each statement execution. The three statistics that we collect are the number of WAL records, the number of full page writes and the amount of WAL bytes generated. This helps the users who have write-intensive workload to see the impact of I/O due to WAL. This further enables us to see approximately what percentage of overall WAL is due to full page writes. In the future, we can extend this functionality to allow us to compute the the exact amount of WAL data due to full page writes. This patch in itself is just an infrastructure to compute WAL usage data. The upcoming patches will expose this data via explain, auto_explain, pg_stat_statements and verbose (auto)vacuum output. Author: Kirill Bychik, Julien Rouhaud Reviewed-by: Dilip Kumar, Fujii Masao and Amit Kapila Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAB-hujrP8ZfUkvL5OYETipQwA=e3n7oqHFU=4ZLxWS_Cza3kQQ@mail.gmail.com
2020-01-01Update copyrights for 2020Bruce Momjian
Backpatch-through: update all files in master, backpatch legal files through 9.4
2019-12-11Further adjust EXPLAIN's choices of table alias names.Tom Lane
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
2019-11-12Make the order of the header file includes consistent in backend modules.Amit Kapila
Similar to commits 7e735035f2 and dddf4cdc33, this commit makes the order of header file inclusion consistent for backend modules. In the passing, removed a couple of duplicate inclusions. Author: Vignesh C Reviewed-by: Kuntal Ghosh and Amit Kapila Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CALDaNm2Sznv8RR6Ex-iJO6xAdsxgWhCoETkaYX=+9DW3q0QCfA@mail.gmail.com
2019-06-07Fix inconsistency in comments atop ExecParallelEstimate.Amit Kapila
When this code was initially introduced in commit d1b7c1ff, the structure used was SharedPlanStateInstrumentation, but later when it got changed to Instrumentation structure in commit b287df70, we forgot to update the comment. Reported-by: Wu Fei Author: Wu Fei Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila Backpatch-through: 9.6 Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/52E6E0843B9D774C8C73D6CF64402F0562215EB2@G08CNEXMBPEKD02.g08.fujitsu.local
2019-05-22Phase 2 pgindent run for v12.Tom Lane
Switch to 2.1 version of pg_bsd_indent. This formats multiline function declarations "correctly", that is with additional lines of parameter declarations indented to match where the first line's left parenthesis is. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=0P3FeTXRcU5B2W3jv3PgRVZ-kGUXLGfd42FFhUROO3ug@mail.gmail.com
2019-05-22Initial pgindent run for v12.Tom Lane
This is still using the 2.0 version of pg_bsd_indent. I thought it would be good to commit this separately, so as to document the differences between 2.0 and 2.1 behavior. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16296.1558103386@sss.pgh.pa.us
2019-03-15Enable parallel query with SERIALIZABLE isolation.Thomas Munro
Previously, the SERIALIZABLE isolation level prevented parallel query from being used. Allow the two features to be used together by sharing the leader's SERIALIZABLEXACT with parallel workers. An extra per-SERIALIZABLEXACT LWLock is introduced to make it safe to share, and new logic is introduced to coordinate the early release of the SERIALIZABLEXACT required for the SXACT_FLAG_RO_SAFE optimization, as follows: The first backend to observe the SXACT_FLAG_RO_SAFE flag (set by some other transaction) will 'partially release' the SERIALIZABLEXACT, meaning that the conflicts and locks it holds are released, but the SERIALIZABLEXACT itself will remain active because other backends might still have a pointer to it. Whenever any backend notices the SXACT_FLAG_RO_SAFE flag, it clears its own MySerializableXact variable and frees local resources so that it can skip SSI checks for the rest of the transaction. In the special case of the leader process, it transfers the SERIALIZABLEXACT to a new variable SavedSerializableXact, so that it can be completely released at the end of the transaction after all workers have exited. Remove the serializable_okay flag added to CreateParallelContext() by commit 9da0cc35, because it's now redundant. Author: Thomas Munro Reviewed-by: Haribabu Kommi, Robert Haas, Masahiko Sawada, Kevin Grittner Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=0gXGYhtrVDWOTHS8SQQy_=S9xo+8oCxGLWZAOoeJ=yzQ@mail.gmail.com
2019-01-29Refactor planner's header files.Tom Lane
Create a new header optimizer/optimizer.h, which exposes just the planner functions that can be used "at arm's length", without need to access Paths or the other planner-internal data structures defined in nodes/relation.h. This is intended to provide the whole planner API seen by most of the rest of the system; although FDWs still need to use additional stuff, and more thought is also needed about just what selfuncs.c should rely on. The main point of doing this now is to limit the amount of new #include baggage that will be needed by "planner support functions", which I expect to introduce later, and which will be in relevant datatype modules rather than anywhere near the planner. This commit just moves relevant declarations into optimizer.h from other header files (a couple of which go away because everything got moved), and adjusts #include lists to match. There's further cleanup that could be done if we want to decide that some stuff being exposed by optimizer.h doesn't belong in the planner at all, but I'll leave that for another day. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/11460.1548706639@sss.pgh.pa.us
2019-01-23Fix misc typos in comments.Heikki Linnakangas
Spotted mostly by Fabien Coelho. Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/alpine.DEB.2.21.1901230947050.16643@lancre
2019-01-02Update copyright for 2019Bruce Momjian
Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.4
2018-10-07Remove some unnecessary fields from Plan trees.Tom Lane
In the wake of commit f2343653f, we no longer need some fields that were used before to control executor lock acquisitions: * PlannedStmt.nonleafResultRelations can go away entirely. * partitioned_rels can go away from Append, MergeAppend, and ModifyTable. However, ModifyTable still needs to know the RT index of the partition root table if any, which was formerly kept in the first entry of that list. Add a new field "rootRelation" to remember that. rootRelation is partly redundant with nominalRelation, in that if it's set it will have the same value as nominalRelation. However, the latter field has a different purpose so it seems best to keep them distinct. Amit Langote, reviewed by David Rowley and Jesper Pedersen, and whacked around a bit more by me Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/468c85d9-540e-66a2-1dde-fec2b741e688@lab.ntt.co.jp
2018-10-03Fix issues around EXPLAIN with JIT.Andres Freund
I (Andres) was more than a bit hasty in committing 33001fd7a7072d48327 after last minute changes, leading to a number of problems (jit output was only shown for JIT in parallel workers, and just EXPLAIN without ANALYZE didn't work). Lukas luckily found these issues quickly. Instead of combining instrumentation in in standard_ExecutorEnd(), do so on demand in the new ExplainPrintJITSummary(). Also update a documentation example of the JIT output, changed in 52050ad8ebec8d831. Author: Lukas Fittl, with minor changes by me Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAP53PkxmgJht69pabxBXJBM+0oc6kf3KHMborLP7H2ouJ0CCtQ@mail.gmail.com Backpatch: 11, where JIT compilation was introduced
2018-09-25Remove obsolete commentAlvaro Herrera
The documented shortcoming was actually fixed in 4c728f3829 so the comment is not true anymore.
2018-09-25Collect JIT instrumentation from workers.Andres Freund
Previously, when using parallel query, EXPLAIN (ANALYZE)'s JIT compilation timings did not include the overhead from doing so on the workers. Fix that. We do so by simply aggregating the cost of doing JIT compilation on workers and the leader together. Arguably that's not quite accurate, because the total time spend doing so is spent in parallel - but it's hard to do much better. For additional detail, when VERBOSE is specified, the stats for workers are displayed separately. Author: Amit Khandekar and Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJ3gD9eLrz51RK_gTkod+71iDcjpB_N8eC6vU2AW-VicsAERpQ@mail.gmail.com Backpatch: 11-
2018-09-15Fix failure with initplans used conditionally during EvalPlanQual rechecks.Tom Lane
The EvalPlanQual machinery assumes that any initplans (that is, uncorrelated sub-selects) used during an EPQ recheck would have already been evaluated during the main query; this is implicit in the fact that execPlan pointers are not copied into the EPQ estate's es_param_exec_vals. But it's possible for that assumption to fail, if the initplan is only reached conditionally. For example, a sub-select inside a CASE expression could be reached during a recheck when it had not been previously, if the CASE test depends on a column that was just updated. This bug is old, appearing to date back to my rewrite of EvalPlanQual in commit 9f2ee8f28, but was not detected until Kyle Samson reported a case. To fix, force all not-yet-evaluated initplans used within the EPQ plan subtree to be evaluated at the start of the recheck, before entering the EPQ environment. This could be inefficient, if such an initplan is expensive and goes unused again during the recheck --- but that's piling one layer of improbability atop another. It doesn't seem worth adding more complexity to prevent that, at least not in the back branches. It was convenient to use the new-in-v11 ExecEvalParamExecParams function to implement this, but I didn't like either its name or the specifics of its API, so revise that. Back-patch all the way. Rather than rewrite the patch to avoid depending on bms_next_member() in the oldest branches, I chose to back-patch that function into 9.4 and 9.3. (This isn't the first time back-patches have needed that, and it exhausted my patience.) I also chose to back-patch some test cases added by commits 71404af2a and 342a1ffa2 into 9.4 and 9.3, so that the 9.x versions of eval-plan-qual.spec are all the same. Andrew Gierth diagnosed the problem and contributed the added test cases, though the actual code changes are by me. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/A033A40A-B234-4324-BE37-272279F7B627@tripadvisor.com
2018-08-03Match the buffer usage tracking for leader and worker backends.Amit Kapila
In the leader backend, we don't track the buffer usage for ExecutorStart phase whereas in worker backend we track it for ExecutorStart phase as well. This leads to different value for buffer usage stats for the parallel and non-parallel query. Change the code so that worker backend also starts tracking buffer usage after ExecutorStart. Author: Amit Kapila and Robert Haas Reviewed-by: Robert Haas and Andres Freund Backpatch-through: 9.6 where this code was introduced Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/86137f17-1dfb-42f9-7421-82fd786b04a1@anayrat.info
2018-03-22Basic planner and executor integration for JIT.Andres Freund
This adds simple cost based plan time decision about whether JIT should be performed. jit_above_cost, jit_optimize_above_cost are compared with the total cost of a plan, and if the cost is above them JIT is performed / optimization is performed respectively. For that PlannedStmt and EState have a jitFlags (es_jit_flags) field that stores information about what JIT operations should be performed. EState now also has a new es_jit field, which can store a JitContext. When there are no errors the context is released in standard_ExecutorEnd(). It is likely that the default values for jit_[optimize_]above_cost will need to be adapted further, but in my test these values seem to work reasonably. Author: Andres Freund, with feedback by Peter Eisentraut Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170901064131.tazjxwus3k2w3ybh@alap3.anarazel.de
2018-02-02Support parallel btree index builds.Robert Haas
To make this work, tuplesort.c and logtape.c must also support parallelism, so this patch adds that infrastructure and then applies it to the particular case of parallel btree index builds. Testing to date shows that this can often be 2-3x faster than a serial index build. The model for deciding how many workers to use is fairly primitive at present, but it's better than not having the feature. We can refine it as we get more experience. Peter Geoghegan with some help from Rushabh Lathia. While Heikki Linnakangas is not an author of this patch, he wrote other patches without which this feature would not have been possible, and therefore the release notes should possibly credit him as an author of this feature. Reviewed by Claudio Freire, Heikki Linnakangas, Thomas Munro, Tels, Amit Kapila, me. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAM3SWZQKM=Pzc=CAHzRixKjp2eO5Q0Jg1SoFQqeXFQ647JiwqQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAH2-Wz=AxWqDoVvGU7dq856S4r6sJAj6DBn7VMtigkB33N5eyg@mail.gmail.com
2018-01-02Update copyright for 2018Bruce Momjian
Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.3
2017-12-21Add parallel-aware hash joins.Andres Freund
Introduce parallel-aware hash joins that appear in EXPLAIN plans as Parallel Hash Join with Parallel Hash. While hash joins could already appear in parallel queries, they were previously always parallel-oblivious and had a partial subplan only on the outer side, meaning that the work of the inner subplan was duplicated in every worker. After this commit, the planner will consider using a partial subplan on the inner side too, using the Parallel Hash node to divide the work over the available CPU cores and combine its results in shared memory. If the join needs to be split into multiple batches in order to respect work_mem, then workers process different batches as much as possible and then work together on the remaining batches. The advantages of a parallel-aware hash join over a parallel-oblivious hash join used in a parallel query are that it: * avoids wasting memory on duplicated hash tables * avoids wasting disk space on duplicated batch files * divides the work of building the hash table over the CPUs One disadvantage is that there is some communication between the participating CPUs which might outweigh the benefits of parallelism in the case of small hash tables. This is avoided by the planner's existing reluctance to supply partial plans for small scans, but it may be necessary to estimate synchronization costs in future if that situation changes. Another is that outer batch 0 must be written to disk if multiple batches are required. A potential future advantage of parallel-aware hash joins is that right and full outer joins could be supported, since there is a single set of matched bits for each hashtable, but that is not yet implemented. A new GUC enable_parallel_hash is defined to control the feature, defaulting to on. Author: Thomas Munro Reviewed-By: Andres Freund, Robert Haas Tested-By: Rafia Sabih, Prabhat Sahu Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=2W=cOkiZxcg6qiFQP-dHUe09aqTrEMM7yJDrHMhDv_RA@mail.gmail.com https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=37HKyJ4U6XOLi=JgfSHM3o6B-GaeO-6hkOmneTDkH+Uw@mail.gmail.com
2017-12-20When passing query strings to workers, pass the terminating \0.Robert Haas
Otherwise, when the query string is read, we might trailing garbage beyond the end, unless there happens to be a \0 there by good luck. Report and patch by Thomas Munro. Reviewed by Rafia Sabih. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=2SJs7X+_vx8QoDu8d1SMEOxtLhxxLNzZun_BvNkuNhrw@mail.gmail.com
2017-12-19Try again to fix accumulation of parallel worker instrumentation.Robert Haas
When a Gather or Gather Merge node is started and stopped multiple times, accumulate instrumentation data only once, at the end, instead of after each execution, to avoid recording inflated totals. Commit 778e78ae9fa51e58f41cbdc72b293291d02d8984, the previous attempt at a fix, instead reset the state after every execution, which worked for the general instrumentation data but had problems for the additional instrumentation specific to Sort and Hash nodes. Report by hubert depesz lubaczewski. Analysis and fix by Amit Kapila, following a design proposal from Thomas Munro, with a comment tweak by me. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/20171127175631.GA405@depesz.com
2017-12-18Fix crashes on plans with multiple Gather (Merge) nodes.Robert Haas
es_query_dsa turns out to be broken by design, because it supposes that there is only one DSA for the whole query, whereas there is actually one per Gather (Merge) node. For now, work around that problem by setting and clearing the pointer around the sections of code that might need it. It's probably a better idea to get rid of es_query_dsa altogether in favor of having each node keep track individually of which DSA is relevant, but that seems like more than we would want to back-patch. Thomas Munro, reviewed and tested by Andreas Seltenreich, Amit Kapila, and by me. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=1U6as=brnVvMNixEV2tpi8NuyQoTmO8Qef0-VV+=7MDA@mail.gmail.com
2017-12-13Revert "Fix accumulation of parallel worker instrumentation."Robert Haas
This reverts commit 2c09a5c12a66087218c7f8cba269cd3de51b9b82. Per further discussion, that doesn't seem to be the best possible fix. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAA4eK1LW2aFKzY3=vwvc=t-juzPPVWP2uT1bpx_MeyEqnM+p8g@mail.gmail.com
2017-12-05Support Parallel Append plan nodes.Robert Haas
When we create an Append node, we can spread out the workers over the subplans instead of piling on to each subplan one at a time, which should typically be a bit more efficient, both because the startup cost of any plan executed entirely by one worker is paid only once and also because of reduced contention. We can also construct Append plans using a mix of partial and non-partial subplans, which may allow for parallelism in places that otherwise couldn't support it. Unfortunately, this patch doesn't handle the important case of parallelizing UNION ALL by running each branch in a separate worker; the executor infrastructure is added here, but more planner work is needed. Amit Khandekar, Robert Haas, Amul Sul, reviewed and tested by Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Langote, Rafia Sabih, Amit Kapila, and Rajkumar Raghuwanshi. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAJ3gD9dy0K_E8r727heqXoBmWZ83HwLFwdcaSSmBQ1+S+vRuUQ@mail.gmail.com
2017-12-05Fix accumulation of parallel worker instrumentation.Robert Haas
When a Gather or Gather Merge node is started and stopped multiple times, the old code wouldn't reset the shared state between executions, potentially resulting in dramatically inflated instrumentation data for nodes beneath it. (The per-worker instrumentation ended up OK, I think, but the overall totals were inflated.) Report by hubert depesz lubaczewski. Analysis and fix by Amit Kapila, reviewed and tweaked a bit by me. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/20171127175631.GA405@depesz.com
2017-12-05Fix EXPLAIN ANALYZE of hash join when the leader doesn't participate.Andres Freund
If a hash join appears in a parallel query, there may be no hash table available for explain.c to inspect even though a hash table may have been built in other processes. This could happen either because parallel_leader_participation was set to off or because the leader happened to hit the end of the outer relation immediately (even though the complete relation is not empty) and decided not to build the hash table. Commit bf11e7ee introduced a way for workers to exchange instrumentation via the DSM segment for Sort nodes even though they are not parallel-aware. This commit does the same for Hash nodes, so that explain.c has a way to find instrumentation data from an arbitrary participant that actually built the hash table. Author: Thomas Munro Reviewed-By: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm%3D3DUQC2-z252N55eOcZBer6DPdM%3DFzrxH9dZc5vYLsjaA%40mail.gmail.com
2017-11-20Pass eflags down to parallel workers.Robert Haas
Currently, there are no known consequences of this oversight, so no back-patch. Several of the EXEC_FLAG_* constants aren't usable in parallel mode anyway, and potential problems related to the presence or absence of OIDs (see EXEC_FLAG_WITH_OIDS, EXEC_FLAG_WITHOUT_OIDS) seem at present to be masked by the unconditional projection step performed by Gather and Gather Merge. In general, however, it seems important that all participants agree on the values of these flags, which modify executor behavior globally, and a pending patch to skip projection in Gather (Merge) would be outright broken in certain cases without this fix. Patch by me, based on investigation of a test case provided by Amit Kapila. This patch was also reviewed by Amit Kapila. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZ0ZL=cesZFq8c9NnfK6bqy-wwUd3_74iYGodYrSoQ7Fw@mail.gmail.com
2017-11-16Provide DSM segment to ExecXXXInitializeWorker functions.Andres Freund
Previously, executor nodes running in parallel worker processes didn't have access to the dsm_segment object used for parallel execution. In order to support resource management based on DSM segment lifetime, they need that. So create a ParallelWorkerContext object to hold it and pass it to all InitializeWorker functions. Author: Thomas Munro Reviewed-By: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=2W=cOkiZxcg6qiFQP-dHUe09aqTrEMM7yJDrHMhDv_RA@mail.gmail.com
2017-11-16Pass InitPlan values to workers via Gather (Merge).Robert Haas
If a PARAM_EXEC parameter is used below a Gather (Merge) but the InitPlan that computes it is attached to or above the Gather (Merge), force the value to be computed before starting parallelism and pass it down to all workers. This allows us to use parallelism in cases where it previously would have had to be rejected as unsafe. We do - in this case - lose the optimization that the value is only computed if it's actually used. An alternative strategy would be to have the first worker that needs the value compute it, but one downside of that approach is that we'd then need to select a parallel-safe path to compute the parameter value; it couldn't for example contain a Gather (Merge) node. At some point in the future, we might want to consider both approaches. Independent of that consideration, there is a great deal more work that could be done to make more kinds of PARAM_EXEC parameters parallel-safe. This infrastructure could be used to allow a Gather (Merge) on the inner side of a nested loop (although that's not a very appealing plan) and cases where the InitPlan is attached below the Gather (Merge) could be addressed as well using various techniques. But this is a good start. Amit Kapila, reviewed and revised by me. Reviewing and testing from Kuntal Ghosh, Haribabu Kommi, and Tushar Ahuja. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAA4eK1LV0Y1AUV4cUCdC+sYOx0Z0-8NAJ2Pd9=UKsbQ5Sr7+JQ@mail.gmail.com
2017-11-13Track in the plan the types associated with PARAM_EXEC parameters.Robert Haas
Up until now, we only tracked the number of parameters, which was sufficient to allocate an array of Datums of the appropriate size, but not sufficient to, for example, know how to serialize a Datum stored in one of those slots. An upcoming patch wants to do that, so add this tracking to make it possible. Patch by me, reviewed by Tom Lane and Amit Kapila. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoYqpxDKn8koHdW8BEKk8FMUL0=e8m2Qe=M+r0UBjr3tuQ@mail.gmail.com
2017-10-11pg_stat_statements: Widen query IDs from 32 bits to 64 bits.Robert Haas
This takes advantage of the infrastructure introduced by commit 81c5e46c490e2426db243eada186995da5bb0ba7 to greatly reduce the likelihood that two different queries will end up with the same query ID. It's still possible, of course, but whereas before it the chances of a collision reached 25% around 50,000 queries, it will now take more than 3 billion queries. Backward incompatibility: Because the type exposed at the SQL level is int8, users may now see negative query IDs in the pg_stat_statements view (and also, query IDs more than 4 billion, which was the old limit). Patch by me, reviewed by Michael Paquier and Peter Geoghegan. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmobG_Kp4cBKFmsznUAaM1GWW6hhRNiZC0KjRMOOeYnz5Yw@mail.gmail.com
2017-09-14Remove TupleDesc remapping logic from tqueue.c.Andres Freund
With the introduction of a shared memory record typmod registry, it is no longer necessary to remap record typmods when sending tuples between backends so most of tqueue.c can be removed. Author: Thomas Munro Reviewed-By: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=0ZtQ-SpsgCyzzYpsXS6e=kZWqk3g5Ygn3MDV7A8dabUA@mail.gmail.com
2017-09-07Reduce excessive dereferencing of function pointersPeter Eisentraut
It is equivalent in ANSI C to write (*funcptr) () and funcptr(). These two styles have been applied inconsistently. After discussion, we'll use the more verbose style for plain function pointer variables, to make it clear that it's a variable, and the shorter style when the function pointer is in a struct (s.func() or s->func()), because then it's clear that it's not a plain function name, and otherwise the excessive punctuation makes some of those invocations hard to read. Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/f52c16db-14ed-757d-4b48-7ef360b1631d@2ndquadrant.com
2017-09-01Improve division of labor between execParallel.c and nodeGather[Merge].c.Tom Lane
Move the responsibility for creating/destroying TupleQueueReaders into execParallel.c, to avoid duplicative coding in nodeGather.c and nodeGatherMerge.c. Also, instead of having DestroyTupleQueueReader do shm_mq_detach, do it in the caller (which is now only ExecParallelFinish). This means execParallel.c does both the attaching and detaching of the tuple-queue-reader shm_mqs, which seems less weird than the previous arrangement. These changes also eliminate a vestigial memory leak (of the pei->tqueue array). It's now demonstrable that rescans of Gather or GatherMerge don't leak memory. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/8670.1504192177@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-08-30Separate reinitialization of shared parallel-scan state from ExecReScan.Tom Lane
Previously, the parallel executor logic did reinitialization of shared state within the ExecReScan code for parallel-aware scan nodes. This is problematic, because it means that the ExecReScan call has to occur synchronously (ie, during the parent Gather node's ReScan call). That is swimming very much against the tide so far as the ExecReScan machinery is concerned; the fact that it works at all today depends on a lot of fragile assumptions, such as that no plan node between Gather and a parallel-aware scan node is parameterized. Another objection is that because ExecReScan might be called in workers as well as the leader, hacky extra tests are needed in some places to prevent unwanted shared-state resets. Hence, let's separate this code into two functions, a ReInitializeDSM call and the ReScan call proper. ReInitializeDSM is called only in the leader and is guaranteed to run before we start new workers. ReScan is returned to its traditional function of resetting only local state, which means that ExecReScan's usual habits of delaying or eliminating child rescan calls are safe again. As with the preceding commit 7df2c1f8d, it doesn't seem to be necessary to make these changes in 9.6, which is a good thing because the FDW and CustomScan APIs are impacted. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAA4eK1JkByysFJNh9M349u_nNjqETuEnY_y1VUc_kJiU0bxtaQ@mail.gmail.com
2017-08-29Propagate sort instrumentation from workers back to leader.Robert Haas
Up until now, when parallel query was used, no details about the sort method or space used by the workers were available; details were shown only for any sorting done by the leader. Fix that. Commit 1177ab1dabf72bafee8f19d904cee3a299f25892 forced the test case added by commit 1f6d515a67ec98194c23a5db25660856c9aab944 to run without parallelism; now that we have this infrastructure, allow that again, with a little tweaking to make it pass with and without force_parallel_mode. Robert Haas and Tom Lane Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmoa2VBZW6S8AAXfhpHczb=Rf6RqQ2br+zJvEgwJ0uoD_tQ@mail.gmail.com
2017-08-29Push tuple limits through Gather and Gather Merge.Robert Haas
If we only need, say, 10 tuples in total, then we certainly don't need more than 10 tuples from any single process. Pushing down the limit lets workers exit early when possible. For Gather Merge, there is an additional benefit: a Sort immediately below the Gather Merge can be done as a bounded sort if there is an applicable limit. Robert Haas and Tom Lane Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoYa3QKKrLj5rX7UvGqhH73G1Li4B-EKxrmASaca2tFu9Q@mail.gmail.com
2017-06-21Phase 3 of pgindent updates.Tom Lane
Don't move parenthesized lines to the left, even if that means they flow past the right margin. By default, BSD indent lines up statement continuation lines that are within parentheses so that they start just to the right of the preceding left parenthesis. However, traditionally, if that resulted in the continuation line extending to the right of the desired right margin, then indent would push it left just far enough to not overrun the margin, if it could do so without making the continuation line start to the left of the current statement indent. That makes for a weird mix of indentations unless one has been completely rigid about never violating the 80-column limit. This behavior has been pretty universally panned by Postgres developers. Hence, disable it with indent's new -lpl switch, so that parenthesized lines are always lined up with the preceding left paren. This patch is much less interesting than the first round of indent changes, but also bulkier, so I thought it best to separate the effects. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1dAmxK-0006EE-1r@gemulon.postgresql.org Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/30527.1495162840@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-06-05Don't be so trusting that shm_toc_lookup() will always succeed.Tom Lane
Given the possibility of race conditions and so on, it seems entirely unsafe to just assume that shm_toc_lookup() always finds the key it's looking for --- but that was exactly what all but one call site were doing. To fix, add a "bool noError" argument, similarly to what we have in many other functions, and throw an error on an unexpected lookup failure. Remove now-redundant Asserts that a rather random subset of call sites had. I doubt this will throw any light on buildfarm member lorikeet's recent failures, because if an unnoticed lookup failure were involved, you'd kind of expect a null-pointer-dereference crash rather than the observed symptom. But you never know ... and this is better coding practice even if it never catches anything. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9697.1496675981@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-05-17Post-PG 10 beta1 pgindent runBruce Momjian
perltidy run not included.
2017-04-14Avoid passing function pointers across process boundaries.Tom Lane
We'd already recognized that we can't pass function pointers across process boundaries for functions in loadable modules, since a shared library could get loaded at different addresses in different processes. But actually the practice doesn't work for functions in the core backend either, if we're using EXEC_BACKEND. This is the cause of recent failures on buildfarm member culicidae. Switch to passing a string function name in all cases. Something like this needs to be back-patched into 9.6, but let's see if the buildfarm likes it first. Petr Jelinek, with a bunch of basically-cosmetic adjustments by me Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/548f9c1d-eafa-e3fa-9da8-f0cc2f654e60@2ndquadrant.com
2017-04-12Avoid transferring parallel-unsafe subplans to parallel workers.Tom Lane
Commit 5e6d8d2bb allowed parallel workers to execute parallel-safe subplans, but it transmitted the query's entire list of subplans to the worker(s). Since execMain.c blindly does ExecInitNode and later ExecEndNode on every list element, this resulted in parallel-unsafe plan nodes nonetheless getting started up and shut down in parallel workers. That seems mostly harmless as far as core plan node types go (but maybe not so much for Gather?). But it resulted in postgres_fdw opening and then closing extra remote connections, and it's likely that other non-parallel-safe FDWs or custom scan providers would have worse reactions. To fix, just make ExecSerializePlan replace parallel-unsafe subplans with NULLs in the cut-down plan tree that it transmits to workers. This relies on ExecInitNode and ExecEndNode to do nothing on NULL input, but they do anyway. If anything else is touching the dropped subplans in a parallel worker, that would be a bug to be fixed. (This thus provides a strong guarantee that we won't try to do something with a parallel-unsafe subplan in a worker.) This is, I think, the last fix directly occasioned by Andreas Seltenreich's bug report of a few days ago. Tom Lane and Amit Kapila Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87tw5x4vcu.fsf@credativ.de
2017-03-31Add infrastructure to support EphemeralNamedRelation references.Kevin Grittner
A QueryEnvironment concept is added, which allows new types of objects to be passed into queries from parsing on through execution. At this point, the only thing implemented is a collection of EphemeralNamedRelation objects -- relations which can be referenced by name in queries, but do not exist in the catalogs. The only type of ENR implemented is NamedTuplestore, but provision is made to add more types fairly easily. An ENR can carry its own TupleDesc or reference a relation in the catalogs by relid. Although these features can be used without SPI, convenience functions are added to SPI so that ENRs can easily be used by code run through SPI. The initial use of all this is going to be transition tables in AFTER triggers, but that will be added to each PL as a separate commit. An incidental effect of this patch is to produce a more informative error message if an attempt is made to modify the contents of a CTE from a referencing DML statement. No tests previously covered that possibility, so one is added. Kevin Grittner and Thomas Munro Reviewed by Heikki Linnakangas, David Fetter, and Thomas Munro with valuable comments and suggestions from many others
2017-03-23Allow for parallel execution whenever ExecutorRun() is done only once.Robert Haas
Previously, it was unsafe to execute a plan in parallel if ExecutorRun() might be called with a non-zero row count. However, it's quite easy to fix things up so that we can support that case, provided that it is known that we will never call ExecutorRun() a second time for the same QueryDesc. Add infrastructure to signal this, and cross-checks to make sure that a caller who claims this is true doesn't later reneg. While that pattern never happens with queries received directly from a client -- there's no way to know whether multiple Execute messages will be sent unless the first one requests all the rows -- it's pretty common for queries originating from procedural languages, which often limit the result to a single tuple or to a user-specified number of tuples. This commit doesn't actually enable parallelism in any additional cases, because currently none of the places that would be able to benefit from this infrastructure pass CURSOR_OPT_PARALLEL_OK in the first place, but it makes it much more palatable to pass CURSOR_OPT_PARALLEL_OK in places where we currently don't, because it eliminates some cases where we'd end up having to run the parallel plan serially. Patch by me, based on some ideas from Rafia Sabih and corrected by Rafia Sabih based on feedback from Dilip Kumar and myself. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmobXEhvHbJtWDuPZM9bVSLiTj-kShxQJ2uM5GPDze9fRYA@mail.gmail.com
2017-03-21Don't scan partitioned tables.Robert Haas
Partitioned tables do not contain any data; only their unpartitioned descendents need to be scanned. However, the partitioned tables still need to be locked, even though they're not scanned. To make that work, Append and MergeAppend relations now need to carry a list of (unscanned) partitioned relations that must be locked, and InitPlan must lock all partitioned result relations. Aside from the obvious advantage of avoiding some work at execution time, this has two other advantages. First, it may improve the planner's decision-making in some cases since the empty relation might throw things off. Second, it paves the way to getting rid of the storage for partitioned tables altogether. Amit Langote, reviewed by me. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/6837c359-45c4-8044-34d1-736756335a15@lab.ntt.co.jp
2017-03-08Support parallel bitmap heap scans.Robert Haas
The index is scanned by a single process, but then all cooperating processes can iterate jointly over the resulting set of heap blocks. In the future, we might also want to support using a parallel bitmap index scan to set up for a parallel bitmap heap scan, but that's a job for another day. Dilip Kumar, with some corrections and cosmetic changes by me. The larger patch set of which this is a part has been reviewed and tested by (at least) Andres Freund, Amit Khandekar, Tushar Ahuja, Rafia Sabih, Haribabu Kommi, Thomas Munro, and me. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAFiTN-uc4=0WxRGfCzs-xfkMYcSEWUC-Fon6thkJGjkh9i=13A@mail.gmail.com
2017-02-22Pass the source text for a parallel query to the workers.Robert Haas
With this change, you can see the query that a parallel worker is executing in pg_stat_activity, and if the worker crashes you can see what query it was executing when it crashed. Rafia Sabih, reviewed by Kuntal Ghosh and Amit Kapila and slightly revised by me.