5 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Tom Lane
c12d570fa1 Support arrays over domains.
Allowing arrays with a domain type as their element type was left un-done
in the original domain patch, but not for any very good reason.  This
omission leads to such surprising results as array_agg() not working on
a domain column, because the parser can't identify a suitable output type
for the polymorphic aggregate.

In order to fix this, first clean up the APIs of coerce_to_domain() and
some internal functions in parse_coerce.c so that we consistently pass
around a CoercionContext along with CoercionForm.  Previously, we sometimes
passed an "isExplicit" boolean flag instead, which is strictly less
information; and coerce_to_domain() didn't even get that, but instead had
to reverse-engineer isExplicit from CoercionForm.  That's contrary to the
documentation in primnodes.h that says that CoercionForm only affects
display and not semantics.  I don't think this change fixes any live bugs,
but it makes things more consistent.  The main reason for doing it though
is that now build_coercion_expression() receives ccontext, which it needs
in order to be able to recursively invoke coerce_to_target_type().

Next, reimplement ArrayCoerceExpr so that the node does not directly know
any details of what has to be done to the individual array elements while
performing the array coercion.  Instead, the per-element processing is
represented by a sub-expression whose input is a source array element and
whose output is a target array element.  This simplifies life in
parse_coerce.c, because it can build that sub-expression by a recursive
invocation of coerce_to_target_type().  The executor now handles the
per-element processing as a compiled expression instead of hard-wired code.
The main advantage of this is that we can use a single ArrayCoerceExpr to
handle as many as three successive steps per element: base type conversion,
typmod coercion, and domain constraint checking.  The old code used two
stacked ArrayCoerceExprs to handle type + typmod coercion, which was pretty
inefficient, and adding yet another array deconstruction to do domain
constraint checking seemed very unappetizing.

In the case where we just need a single, very simple coercion function,
doing this straightforwardly leads to a noticeable increase in the
per-array-element runtime cost.  Hence, add an additional shortcut evalfunc
in execExprInterp.c that skips unnecessary overhead for that specific form
of expression.  The runtime speed of simple cases is within 1% or so of
where it was before, while cases that previously required two levels of
array processing are significantly faster.

Finally, create an implicit array type for every domain type, as we do for
base types, enums, etc.  Everything except the array-coercion case seems
to just work without further effort.

Tom Lane, reviewed by Andrew Dunstan

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9852.1499791473@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-09-30 13:40:56 -04:00
Tom Lane
decb08ebdf Code review for NextValueExpr expression node type.
Add missing infrastructure for this node type, notably in ruleutils.c where
its lack could demonstrably cause EXPLAIN to fail.  Add outfuncs/readfuncs
support.  (outfuncs support is useful today for debugging purposes.  The
readfuncs support may never be needed, since at present it would only
matter for parallel query and NextValueExpr should never appear in a
parallelizable query; but it seems like a bad idea to have a primnode type
that isn't fully supported here.)  Teach planner infrastructure that
NextValueExpr is a volatile, parallel-unsafe, non-leaky expression node
with cost cpu_operator_cost.  Given its limited scope of usage, there
*might* be no live bug today from the lack of that knowledge, but it's
certainly going to bite us on the rear someday.  Teach pg_stat_statements
about the new node type, too.

While at it, also teach cost_qual_eval() that MinMaxExpr, SQLValueFunction,
XmlExpr, and CoerceToDomain should be charged as cpu_operator_cost.
Failing to do this for SQLValueFunction was an oversight in my commit
0bb51aa96.  The others are longer-standing oversights, but no time like the
present to fix them.  (In principle, CoerceToDomain could have cost much
higher than this, but it doesn't presently seem worth trying to examine the
domain's constraints here.)

Modify execExprInterp.c to execute NextValueExpr as an out-of-line
function; it seems quite unlikely to me that it's worth insisting that
it be inlined in all expression eval methods.  Besides, providing the
out-of-line function doesn't stop anyone from inlining if they want to.

Adjust some places where NextValueExpr support had been inserted with the
aid of a dartboard rather than keeping it in the same order as elsewhere.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/23862.1499981661@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-07-14 15:25:43 -04:00
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 e3860ffa4dd0dad0dd9eea4be9cc1412373a8c89 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
2017-06-21 15:19:25 -04:00
Peter Eisentraut
3217327053 Identity columns
This is the SQL standard-conforming variant of PostgreSQL's serial
columns.  It fixes a few usability issues that serial columns have:

- CREATE TABLE / LIKE copies default but refers to same sequence
- cannot add/drop serialness with ALTER TABLE
- dropping default does not drop sequence
- need to grant separate privileges to sequence
- other slight weirdnesses because serial is some kind of special macro

Reviewed-by: Vitaly Burovoy <vitaly.burovoy@gmail.com>
2017-04-06 08:41:37 -04:00
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
2017-03-25 14:52:06 -07:00