22 Commits (b6f3649bba9832cf4958dbb184dabef93dcea29c)

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Andres Freund	4da597edf1	Make TupleTableSlots extensible, finish split of existing slot type. ... This commit completes the work prepared in 1a0586de36, splitting the old TupleTableSlot implementation (which could store buffer, heap, minimal and virtual slots) into four different slot types. As described in the aforementioned commit, this is done with the goal of making tuple table slots extensible, to allow for pluggable table access methods. To achieve runtime extensibility for TupleTableSlots, operations on slots that can differ between types of slots are performed using the TupleTableSlotOps struct provided at slot creation time. That includes information from the size of TupleTableSlot struct to be allocated, initialization, deforming etc. See the struct's definition for more detailed information about callbacks TupleTableSlotOps. I decided to rename TTSOpsBufferTuple to TTSOpsBufferHeapTuple and ExecCopySlotTuple to ExecCopySlotHeapTuple, as that seems more consistent with other naming introduced in recent patches. There's plenty optimization potential in the slot implementation, but according to benchmarking the state after this commit has similar performance characteristics to before this set of changes, which seems sufficient. There's a few changes in execReplication.c that currently need to poke through the slot abstraction, that'll be repaired once the pluggable storage patchset provides the necessary infrastructure. Author: Andres Freund and Ashutosh Bapat, with changes by Amit Khandekar Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181105210039.hh4vvi4vwoq5ba2q@alap3.anarazel.de	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	29ef2b310d	Restore sane locking behavior during parallel query. ... Commit 9a3cebeaa changed things so that parallel workers didn't obtain any lock of their own on tables they access. That was clearly a bad idea, but I'd mistakenly supposed that it was the intended end result of the series of patches for simplifying the executor's lock management. Undo that change in relation_open(), and adjust ExecOpenScanRelation() so that it gets the correct lock if inside a parallel worker. In passing, clean up some more obsolete comments about when locks are acquired. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/468c85d9-540e-66a2-1dde-fec2b741e688@lab.ntt.co.jp	7 years ago
Tom Lane	9ddef36278	Centralize executor's opening/closing of Relations for rangetable entries. ... Create an array estate->es_relations[] paralleling the es_range_table, and store references to Relations (relcache entries) there, so that any given RT entry is opened and closed just once per executor run. Scan nodes typically still call ExecOpenScanRelation, but ExecCloseScanRelation is no more; relation closing is now done centrally in ExecEndPlan. This is slightly more complex than one would expect because of the interactions with relcache references held in ResultRelInfo nodes. The general convention is now that ResultRelInfo->ri_RelationDesc does not represent a separate relcache reference and so does not need to be explicitly closed; but there is an exception for ResultRelInfos in the es_trig_target_relations list, which are manufactured by ExecGetTriggerResultRel and have to be cleaned up by ExecCleanUpTriggerState. (That much was true all along, but these ResultRelInfos are now more different from others than they used to be.) To allow the partition pruning logic to make use of es_relations[] rather than having its own relcache references, adjust PartitionedRelPruneInfo to store an RT index rather than a relation OID. Amit Langote, reviewed by David Rowley and Jesper Pedersen, some mods by me Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/468c85d9-540e-66a2-1dde-fec2b741e688@lab.ntt.co.jp	7 years ago
Andres Freund	29c94e03c7	Split ExecStoreTuple into ExecStoreHeapTuple and ExecStoreBufferHeapTuple. ... Upcoming changes introduce further types of tuple table slots, in preparation of making table storage pluggable. New storage methods will have different representation of tuples, therefore the slot accessor should refer explicitly to heap tuples. Instead of just renaming the functions, split it into one function that accepts heap tuples not residing in buffers, and one accepting ones in buffers. Previously one function was used for both, but that was a bit awkward already, and splitting will allow us to represent slot types for tuples in buffers and normal memory separately. This is split out from the patch introducing abstract slots, as this largely consists out of mechanical changes. Author: Ashutosh Bapat Reviewed-By: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180220224318.gw4oe5jadhpmcdnm@alap3.anarazel.de	7 years ago
Tom Lane	bdf46af748	Post-feature-freeze pgindent run. ... Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15719.1523984266@sss.pgh.pa.us	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	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
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
Tom Lane	c7b8998ebb	Phase 2 of pgindent updates. ... Change pg_bsd_indent to follow upstream rules for placement of comments to the right of code, and remove pgindent hack that caused comments following #endif to not obey the general rule. Commit e3860ffa4d wasn't actually using the published version of pg_bsd_indent, but a hacked-up version that tried to minimize the amount of movement of comments to the right of code. The situation of interest is where such a comment has to be moved to the right of its default placement at column 33 because there's code there. BSD indent has always moved right in units of tab stops in such cases --- but in the previous incarnation, indent was working in 8-space tab stops, while now it knows we use 4-space tabs. So the net result is that in about half the cases, such comments are placed one tab stop left of before. This is better all around: it leaves more room on the line for comment text, and it means that in such cases the comment uniformly starts at the next 4-space tab stop after the code, rather than sometimes one and sometimes two tabs after. Also, ensure that comments following #endif are indented the same as comments following other preprocessor commands such as #else. That inconsistency turns out to have been self-inflicted damage from a poorly-thought-through post-indent "fixup" in pgindent. 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
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
Andres Freund	ea15e18677	Remove obsoleted code relating to targetlist SRF evaluation. ... Since 69f4b9c plain expression evaluation (and thus normal projection) can't return sets of tuples anymore. Thus remove code dealing with that possibility. This will require adjustments in external code using ExecEvalExpr()/ExecProject() - that should neither be hard nor very common. Author: Andres Freund and Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20160822214023.aaxz5l4igypowyri@alap3.anarazel.de	9 years ago
Peter Eisentraut	352a24a1f9	Generate fmgr prototypes automatically ... Gen_fmgrtab.pl creates a new file fmgrprotos.h, which contains prototypes for all functions registered in pg_proc.h. This avoids having to manually maintain these prototypes across a random variety of header files. It also automatically enforces a correct function signature, and since there are warnings about missing prototypes, it will detect functions that are defined but not registered in pg_proc.h (or otherwise used). Reviewed-by: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>	9 years ago
Bruce Momjian	1d25779284	Update copyright via script for 2017	9 years ago
Kevin Grittner	a343e223a5	Revert no-op changes to BufferGetPage() ... The reverted changes were intended to force a choice of whether any newly-added BufferGetPage() calls needed to be accompanied by a test of the snapshot age, to support the "snapshot too old" feature. Such an accompanying test is needed in about 7% of the cases, where the page is being used as part of a scan rather than positioning for other purposes (such as DML or vacuuming). The additional effort required for back-patching, and the doubt whether the intended benefit would really be there, have indicated it is best just to rely on developers to do the right thing based on comments and existing usage, as we do with many other conventions. This change should have little or no effect on generated executable code. Motivated by the back-patching pain of Tom Lane and Robert Haas	10 years ago
Kevin Grittner	8b65cf4c5e	Modify BufferGetPage() to prepare for "snapshot too old" feature ... This patch is a no-op patch which is intended to reduce the chances of failures of omission once the functional part of the "snapshot too old" patch goes in. It adds parameters for snapshot, relation, and an enum to specify whether the snapshot age check needs to be done for the page at this point. This initial patch passes NULL for the first two new parameters and BGP_NO_SNAPSHOT_TEST for the third. The follow-on patch will change the places where the test needs to be made.	10 years ago
Bruce Momjian	ee94300446	Update copyright for 2016 ... Backpatch certain files through 9.1	10 years ago
Tom Lane	dd7a8f66ed	Redesign tablesample method API, and do extensive code review. ... The original implementation of TABLESAMPLE modeled the tablesample method API on index access methods, which wasn't a good choice because, without specialized DDL commands, there's no way to build an extension that can implement a TSM. (Raw inserts into system catalogs are not an acceptable thing to do, because we can't undo them during DROP EXTENSION, nor will pg_upgrade behave sanely.) Instead adopt an API more like procedural language handlers or foreign data wrappers, wherein the only SQL-level support object needed is a single handler function identified by having a special return type. This lets us get rid of the supporting catalog altogether, so that no custom DDL support is needed for the feature. Adjust the API so that it can support non-constant tablesample arguments (the original coding assumed we could evaluate the argument expressions at ExecInitSampleScan time, which is undesirable even if it weren't outright unsafe), and discourage sampling methods from looking at invisible tuples. Make sure that the BERNOULLI and SYSTEM methods are genuinely repeatable within and across queries, as required by the SQL standard, and deal more honestly with methods that can't support that requirement. Make a full code-review pass over the tablesample additions, and fix assorted bugs, omissions, infelicities, and cosmetic issues (such as failure to put the added code stanzas in a consistent ordering). Improve EXPLAIN's output of tablesample plans, too. Back-patch to 9.5 so that we don't have to support the original API in production.	11 years ago
Bruce Momjian	807b9e0dff	pgindent run for 9.5	11 years ago
Simon Riggs	f6d208d6e5	TABLESAMPLE, SQL Standard and extensible ... Add a TABLESAMPLE clause to SELECT statements that allows user to specify random BERNOULLI sampling or block level SYSTEM sampling. Implementation allows for extensible sampling functions to be written, using a standard API. Basic version follows SQLStandard exactly. Usable concrete use cases for the sampling API follow in later commits. Petr Jelinek Reviewed by Michael Paquier and Simon Riggs	11 years ago