17 Commits (b55413d77f96b9fa2dfae4ddec43412b90ebf588)

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Alvaro Herrera	3974c4a724	Remove useless "return;" lines ... Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20191128144653.GA27883@alvherre.pgsql	6 years ago
Amit Kapila	14aec03502	Make the order of the header file includes consistent in backend modules. ... 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	6 years ago
Tom Lane	1cff1b95ab	Represent Lists as expansible arrays, not chains of cons-cells. ... Originally, Postgres Lists were a more or less exact reimplementation of Lisp lists, which consist of chains of separately-allocated cons cells, each having a value and a next-cell link. We'd hacked that once before (commit d0b4399d8) to add a separate List header, but the data was still in cons cells. That makes some operations -- notably list_nth() -- O(N), and it's bulky because of the next-cell pointers and per-cell palloc overhead, and it's very cache-unfriendly if the cons cells end up scattered around rather than being adjacent. In this rewrite, we still have List headers, but the data is in a resizable array of values, with no next-cell links. Now we need at most two palloc's per List, and often only one, since we can allocate some values in the same palloc call as the List header. (Of course, extending an existing List may require repalloc's to enlarge the array. But this involves just O(log N) allocations not O(N).) Of course this is not without downsides. The key difficulty is that addition or deletion of a list entry may now cause other entries to move, which it did not before. For example, that breaks foreach() and sister macros, which historically used a pointer to the current cons-cell as loop state. We can repair those macros transparently by making their actual loop state be an integer list index; the exposed "ListCell *" pointer is no longer state carried across loop iterations, but is just a derived value. (In practice, modern compilers can optimize things back to having just one loop state value, at least for simple cases with inline loop bodies.) In principle, this is a semantics change for cases where the loop body inserts or deletes list entries ahead of the current loop index; but I found no such cases in the Postgres code. The change is not at all transparent for code that doesn't use foreach() but chases lists "by hand" using lnext(). The largest share of such code in the backend is in loops that were maintaining "prev" and "next" variables in addition to the current-cell pointer, in order to delete list cells efficiently using list_delete_cell(). However, we no longer need a previous-cell pointer to delete a list cell efficiently. Keeping a next-cell pointer doesn't work, as explained above, but we can improve matters by changing such code to use a regular foreach() loop and then using the new macro foreach_delete_current() to delete the current cell. (This macro knows how to update the associated foreach loop's state so that no cells will be missed in the traversal.) There remains a nontrivial risk of code assuming that a ListCell * pointer will remain good over an operation that could now move the list contents. To help catch such errors, list.c can be compiled with a new define symbol DEBUG_LIST_MEMORY_USAGE that forcibly moves list contents whenever that could possibly happen. This makes list operations significantly more expensive so it's not normally turned on (though it is on by default if USE_VALGRIND is on). There are two notable API differences from the previous code: * lnext() now requires the List's header pointer in addition to the current cell's address. * list_delete_cell() no longer requires a previous-cell argument. These changes are somewhat unfortunate, but on the other hand code using either function needs inspection to see if it is assuming anything it shouldn't, so it's not all bad. Programmers should be aware of these significant performance changes: * list_nth() and related functions are now O(1); so there's no major access-speed difference between a list and an array. * Inserting or deleting a list element now takes time proportional to the distance to the end of the list, due to moving the array elements. (However, it typically *doesn't* require palloc or pfree, so except in long lists it's probably still faster than before.) Notably, lcons() used to be about the same cost as lappend(), but that's no longer true if the list is long. Code that uses lcons() and list_delete_first() to maintain a stack might usefully be rewritten to push and pop at the end of the list rather than the beginning. * There are now list_insert_nth...() and list_delete_nth...() functions that add or remove a list cell identified by index. These have the data-movement penalty explained above, but there's no search penalty. * list_concat() and variants now copy the second list's data into storage belonging to the first list, so there is no longer any sharing of cells between the input lists. The second argument is now declared "const List *" to reflect that it isn't changed. This patch just does the minimum needed to get the new implementation in place and fix bugs exposed by the regression tests. As suggested by the foregoing, there's a fair amount of followup work remaining to do. Also, the ENABLE_LIST_COMPAT macros are finally removed in this commit. Code using those should have been gone a dozen years ago. Patch by me; thanks to David Rowley, Jesper Pedersen, and others for review. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/11587.1550975080@sss.pgh.pa.us	7 years ago
Bruce Momjian	97c39498e5	Update copyright for 2019 ... Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.4	7 years ago
Andres Freund	1a0586de36	Introduce notion of different types of slots (without implementing them). ... Upcoming work intends to allow pluggable ways to introduce new ways of storing table data. Accessing those table access methods from the executor requires TupleTableSlots to be carry tuples in the native format of such storage methods; otherwise there'll be a significant conversion overhead. Different access methods will require different data to store tuples efficiently (just like virtual, minimal, heap already require fields in TupleTableSlot). To allow that without requiring additional pointer indirections, we want to have different structs (embedding TupleTableSlot) for different types of slots. Thus different types of slots are needed, which requires adapting creators of slots. The slot that most efficiently can represent a type of tuple in an executor node will often depend on the type of slot a child node uses. Therefore we need to track the type of slot is returned by nodes, so parent slots can create slots based on that. Relatedly, JIT compilation of tuple deforming needs to know which type of slot a certain expression refers to, so it can create an appropriate deforming function for the type of tuple in the slot. But not all nodes will only return one type of slot, e.g. an append node will potentially return different types of slots for each of its subplans. Therefore add function that allows to query the type of a node's result slot, and whether it'll always be the same type (whether it's fixed). This can be queried using ExecGetResultSlotOps(). The scan, result, inner, outer type of slots are automatically inferred from ExecInitScanTupleSlot(), ExecInitResultSlot(), left/right subtrees respectively. If that's not correct for a node, that can be overwritten using new fields in PlanState. This commit does not introduce the actually abstracted implementation of different kind of TupleTableSlots, that will be left for a followup commit. The different types of slots introduced will, for now, still use the same backing implementation. While this already partially invalidates the big comment in tuptable.h, it seems to make more sense to update it later, when the different TupleTableSlot implementations actually exist. Author: Ashutosh Bapat and Andres Freund, with changes by Amit Khandekar Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181105210039.hh4vvi4vwoq5ba2q@alap3.anarazel.de	7 years ago
Andres Freund	1ef6bd2954	Don't require return slots for nodes without projection. ... In a lot of nodes the return slot is not required. That can either be because the node doesn't do any projection (say an Append node), or because the node does perform projections but the projection is optimized away because the projection would yield an identical row. Slots aren't that small, especially for wide rows, so it's worthwhile to avoid creating them. It's not possible to just skip creating the slot - it's currently used to determine the tuple descriptor returned by ExecGetResultType(). So separate the determination of the result type from the slot creation. The work previously done internally ExecInitResultTupleSlotTL() can now also be done separately with ExecInitResultTypeTL() and ExecInitResultSlot(). That way nodes that aren't guaranteed to need a result slot, can use ExecInitResultTypeTL() to determine the result type of the node, and ExecAssignScanProjectionInfo() (via ExecConditionalAssignProjectionInfo()) determines that a result slot is needed, it is created with ExecInitResultSlot(). Besides the advantage of avoiding to create slots that then are unused, this is necessary preparation for later patches around tuple table slot abstraction. In particular separating the return descriptor and slot is a prerequisite to allow JITing of tuple deforming with knowledge of the underlying tuple format, and to avoid unnecessarily creating JITed tuple deforming for virtual slots. This commit removes a redundant argument from ExecInitResultTupleSlotTL(). While this commit touches a lot of the relevant lines anyway, it'd normally still not worthwhile to cause breakage, except that aforementioned later commits will touch *all* ExecInitResultTupleSlotTL() callers anyway (but fits worse thematically). Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181105210039.hh4vvi4vwoq5ba2q@alap3.anarazel.de	7 years ago
Tom Lane	07a3af0ff8	Fix parsetree representation of XMLTABLE(XMLNAMESPACES(DEFAULT ...)). ... The original coding for XMLTABLE thought it could represent a default namespace by a T_String Value node with a null string pointer. That's not okay, though; in particular outfuncs.c/readfuncs.c are not on board with such a representation, meaning you'll get a null pointer crash if you try to store a view or rule containing this construct. To fix, change the parsetree representation so that we have a NULL list element, instead of a bogus Value node. This isn't really a functional limitation since default XML namespaces aren't yet implemented in the executor; you'd just get "DEFAULT namespace is not supported" anyway. But crashes are not nice, so back-patch to v10 where this syntax was added. Ordinarily we'd consider a parsetree representation change to be un-backpatchable; but since existing releases would crash on the way to storing such constructs, there can't be any existing views/rules to be incompatible with. Per report from Andrey Lepikhov. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3690074f-abd2-56a9-144a-aa5545d7a291@postgrespro.ru	7 years ago
Andrew Gierth	07172d5aff	Avoid query-lifetime memory leaks in XMLTABLE (bug #15321) ... Multiple calls to XMLTABLE in a query (e.g. laterally applying it to a table with an xml column, an important use-case) were leaking large amounts of memory into the per-query context, blowing up memory usage. Repair by reorganizing memory context usage in nodeTableFuncscan; use the usual per-tuple context for row-by-row evaluations instead of perValueCxt, and use the explicitly created context -- renamed from perValueCxt to perTableCxt -- for arguments and state for each individual table-generation operation. Backpatch to PG10 where this code was introduced. Original report by IRC user begriffs; analysis and patch by me. Reviewed by Tom Lane and Pavel Stehule. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/153394403528.10284.7530399040974170549@wrigleys.postgresql.org	8 years ago
Andres Freund	ad7dbee368	Allow tupleslots to have a fixed tupledesc, use in executor nodes. ... The reason for doing so is that it will allow expression evaluation to optimize based on the underlying tupledesc. In particular it will allow to JIT tuple deforming together with the expression itself. For that expression initialization needs to be moved after the relevant slots are initialized - mostly unproblematic, except in the case of nodeWorktablescan.c. After doing so there's no need for ExecAssignResultType() and ExecAssignResultTypeFromTL() anymore, as all former callers have been converted to create a slot with a fixed descriptor. When creating a slot with a fixed descriptor, tts_values/isnull can be allocated together with the main slot, reducing allocation overhead and increasing cache density a bit. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20171206093717.vqdxe5icqttpxs3p@alap3.anarazel.de	8 years ago
Bruce Momjian	9d4649ca49	Update copyright for 2018 ... Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.3	8 years ago
Andres Freund	2cd7084524	Change tupledesc->attrs[n] to TupleDescAttr(tupledesc, n). ... This is a mechanical change in preparation for a later commit that will change the layout of TupleDesc. Introducing a macro to abstract the details of where attributes are stored will allow us to change that in separate step and revise it in future. Author: Thomas Munro, editorialized by Andres Freund Reviewed-By: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=0ZtQ-SpsgCyzzYpsXS6e=kZWqk3g5Ygn3MDV7A8dabUA@mail.gmail.com	9 years ago
Andres Freund	cc9f08b6b8	Move ExecProcNode from dispatch to function pointer based model. ... This allows us to add stack-depth checks the first time an executor node is called, and skip that overhead on following calls. Additionally it yields a nice speedup. While it'd probably have been a good idea to have that check all along, it has become more important after the new expression evaluation framework in b8d7f053c5 - there's no stack depth check in common paths anymore now. We previously relied on ExecEvalExpr() being executed somewhere. We should move towards that model for further routines, but as this is required for v10, it seems better to only do the necessary (which already is quite large). Author: Andres Freund, Tom Lane Reported-By: Julien Rouhaud Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/22833.1490390175@sss.pgh.pa.us https://postgr.es/m/b0af9eaa-130c-60d0-9e4e-7a135b1e0c76@dalibo.com	9 years ago
Andres Freund	d47cfef711	Move interrupt checking from ExecProcNode() to executor nodes. ... In a followup commit ExecProcNode(), and especially the large switch it contains, will largely be replaced by a function pointer directly to the correct node. The node functions will then get invoked by a thin inline function wrapper. To avoid having to include miscadmin.h in headers - CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() - move the interrupt checks into the individual executor routines. While looking through all executor nodes, I noticed a number of arguably missing interrupt checks, add these too. Author: Andres Freund, Tom Lane Reviewed-By: Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/22833.1490390175@sss.pgh.pa.us	9 years ago
Tom Lane	382ceffdf7	Phase 3 of pgindent updates. ... 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	9 years ago
Bruce Momjian	a6fd7b7a5f	Post-PG 10 beta1 pgindent run ... perltidy run not included.	9 years ago
Andres Freund	b8d7f053c5	Faster expression evaluation and targetlist projection. ... This replaces the old, recursive tree-walk based evaluation, with non-recursive, opcode dispatch based, expression evaluation. Projection is now implemented as part of expression evaluation. This both leads to significant performance improvements, and makes future just-in-time compilation of expressions easier. The speed gains primarily come from: - non-recursive implementation reduces stack usage / overhead - simple sub-expressions are implemented with a single jump, without function calls - sharing some state between different sub-expressions - reduced amount of indirect/hard to predict memory accesses by laying out operation metadata sequentially; including the avoidance of nearly all of the previously used linked lists - more code has been moved to expression initialization, avoiding constant re-checks at evaluation time Future just-in-time compilation (JIT) has become easier, as demonstrated by released patches intended to be merged in a later release, for primarily two reasons: Firstly, due to a stricter split between expression initialization and evaluation, less code has to be handled by the JIT. Secondly, due to the non-recursive nature of the generated "instructions", less performance-critical code-paths can easily be shared between interpreted and compiled evaluation. The new framework allows for significant future optimizations. E.g.: - basic infrastructure for to later reduce the per executor-startup overhead of expression evaluation, by caching state in prepared statements. That'd be helpful in OLTPish scenarios where initialization overhead is measurable. - optimizing the generated "code". A number of proposals for potential work has already been made. - optimizing the interpreter. Similarly a number of proposals have been made here too. The move of logic into the expression initialization step leads to some backward-incompatible changes: - Function permission checks are now done during expression initialization, whereas previously they were done during execution. In edge cases this can lead to errors being raised that previously wouldn't have been, e.g. a NULL array being coerced to a different array type previously didn't perform checks. - The set of domain constraints to be checked, is now evaluated once during expression initialization, previously it was re-built every time a domain check was evaluated. For normal queries this doesn't change much, but e.g. for plpgsql functions, which caches ExprStates, the old set could stick around longer. The behavior around might still change. Author: Andres Freund, with significant changes by Tom Lane, changes by Heikki Linnakangas Reviewed-By: Tom Lane, Heikki Linnakangas Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20161206034955.bh33paeralxbtluv@alap3.anarazel.de	9 years ago
Alvaro Herrera	fcec6caafa	Support XMLTABLE query expression ... XMLTABLE is defined by the SQL/XML standard as a feature that allows turning XML-formatted data into relational form, so that it can be used as a <table primary> in the FROM clause of a query. This new construct provides significant simplicity and performance benefit for XML data processing; what in a client-side custom implementation was reported to take 20 minutes can be executed in 400ms using XMLTABLE. (The same functionality was said to take 10 seconds using nested PostgreSQL XPath function calls, and 5 seconds using XMLReader under PL/Python). The implemented syntax deviates slightly from what the standard requires. First, the standard indicates that the PASSING clause is optional and that multiple XML input documents may be given to it; we make it mandatory and accept a single document only. Second, we don't currently support a default namespace to be specified. This implementation relies on a new executor node based on a hardcoded method table. (Because the grammar is fixed, there is no extensibility in the current approach; further constructs can be implemented on top of this such as JSON_TABLE, but they require changes to core code.) Author: Pavel Stehule, Álvaro Herrera Extensively reviewed by: Craig Ringer Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFj8pRAgfzMD-LoSmnMGybD0WsEznLHWap8DO79+-GTRAPR4qA@mail.gmail.com	9 years ago