summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/backend/optimizer/util/orclauses.c
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2025-01-01Update copyright for 2025Bruce Momjian
Backpatch-through: 13
2024-03-25Code review for 6190d828cd2Amit Langote
* Fix the comment of init_dummy_sjinfo() to remove references to non-existing parameters 'rel1' and 'rel2'. * Adjust consider_new_or_clause() to call init_dummy_sjinfo() to make up a SpecialJoinInfo for inner joins like other code sites that were adjusted in 6190d828cd2 to do so. Author: Richard Guo <[email protected]> Reported-by: Richard Guo <[email protected]> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAExHW5tHqEf3ASVqvFFcghYGPfpy7o3xnvhHwBGbJFMRH8KjNw@mail.gmail.com
2024-03-04Remove unused #include's from backend .c filesPeter Eisentraut
as determined by include-what-you-use (IWYU) While IWYU also suggests to *add* a bunch of #include's (which is its main purpose), this patch does not do that. In some cases, a more specific #include replaces another less specific one. Some manual adjustments of the automatic result: - IWYU currently doesn't know about includes that provide global variable declarations (like -Wmissing-variable-declarations), so those includes are being kept manually. - All includes for port(ability) headers are being kept for now, to play it safe. - No changes of catalog/pg_foo.h to catalog/pg_foo_d.h, to keep the patch from exploding in size. Note that this patch touches just *.c files, so nothing declared in header files changes in hidden ways. As a small example, in src/backend/access/transam/rmgr.c, some IWYU pragma annotations are added to handle a special case there. Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/af837490-6b2f-46df-ba05-37ea6a6653fc%40eisentraut.org
2024-01-04Update copyright for 2024Bruce Momjian
Reported-by: Michael Paquier Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected] Backpatch-through: 12
2023-05-25Fix filtering of "cloned" outer-join quals some more.Tom Lane
We've had multiple issues with the clause_is_computable_at logic that I introduced in 2489d76c4: it's been known to accept more than one clone of the same qual at the same plan node, and also to accept no clones at all. It's looking impractical to get it 100% right on the basis of the currently-stored information, so fix it by introducing a new RestrictInfo field "incompatible_relids" that explicitly shows which outer joins a given clone mustn't be pushed above. In principle we could populate this field in every RestrictInfo, but that would cost space and there doesn't presently seem to be a need for it in general. Also, while deconstruct_distribute_oj_quals can easily fill the field with the remaining members of the commutative join set that it's considering, computing it in the general case seems again pretty complicated. So for now, just fill it for clone quals. Along the way, fix a bug that may or may not be only latent: equivclass.c was generating replacement clauses with is_pushed_down and has_clone/is_clone markings that didn't match their required_relids. This led me to conclude that leaving the clone flags out of make_restrictinfo's purview wasn't such a great idea after all, so add them. Per report from Richard Guo. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMbWs48EYi_9-pSd0ORes1kTmTeAjT4Q3gu49hJtYCbSn2JyeA@mail.gmail.com
2023-05-17Fix some issues with improper placement of outer join clauses.Tom Lane
After applying outer-join identity 3 in the forward direction, it was possible for the planner to mistakenly apply a qual clause from above the two outer joins at the now-lower join level. This can give the wrong answer, since a value that would get nulled by the now-upper join might not yet be null. To fix, when we perform such a transformation, consider that the now-lower join hasn't really completed the outer join it's nominally responsible for and thus its relid set should not include that OJ's relid (nor should its output Vars have that nullingrel bit set). Instead we add those bits when the now-upper join is performed. The existing rules for qual placement then suffice to prevent higher qual clauses from dropping below the now-upper join. There are a few complications from needing to consider transitive closures in case multiple pushdowns have happened, but all in all it's not a very complex patch. This is all new logic (from 2489d76c4) so no need to back-patch. The added test cases all have the same results as in v15. Tom Lane and Richard Guo Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected]
2023-01-30Do assorted mop-up in the planner.Tom Lane
Remove RestrictInfo.nullable_relids, along with a good deal of infrastructure that calculated it. One use-case for it was in join_clause_is_movable_to, but we can now replace that usage with a check to see if the clause's relids include any outer join that can null the target relation. The other use-case was in join_clause_is_movable_into, but that test can just be dropped entirely now that the clause's relids include outer joins. Furthermore, join_clause_is_movable_into should now be accurate enough that it will accept anything returned by generate_join_implied_equalities, so we can restore the Assert that was diked out in commit 95f4e59c3. Remove the outerjoin_delayed mechanism. We needed this before to prevent quals from getting evaluated below outer joins that should null some of their vars. Now that we consider varnullingrels while placing quals, that's taken care of automatically, so throw the whole thing away. Teach remove_useless_result_rtes to also remove useless FromExprs. Having done that, the delay_upper_joins flag serves no purpose any more and we can remove it, largely reverting 11086f2f2. Use constant TRUE for "dummy" clauses when throwing back outer joins. This improves on a hack I introduced in commit 6a6522529. If we have a left-join clause l.x = r.y, and a WHERE clause l.x = constant, we generate r.y = constant and then don't really have a need for the join clause. But we must throw the join clause back anyway after marking it redundant, so that the join search heuristics won't think this is a clauseless join and avoid it. That was a kluge introduced under time pressure, and after looking at it I thought of a better way: let's just introduce constant-TRUE "join clauses" instead, and get rid of them at the end. This improves the generated plans for such cases by not having to test a redundant join clause. We can also get rid of the ugly hack used to mark such clauses as redundant for selectivity estimation. Patch by me; thanks to Richard Guo for review. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected]
2023-01-30Make Vars be outer-join-aware.Tom Lane
Traditionally we used the same Var struct to represent the value of a table column everywhere in parse and plan trees. This choice predates our support for SQL outer joins, and it's really a pretty bad idea with outer joins, because the Var's value can depend on where it is in the tree: it might go to NULL above an outer join. So expression nodes that are equal() per equalfuncs.c might not represent the same value, which is a huge correctness hazard for the planner. To improve this, decorate Var nodes with a bitmapset showing which outer joins (identified by RTE indexes) may have nulled them at the point in the parse tree where the Var appears. This allows us to trust that equal() Vars represent the same value. A certain amount of klugery is still needed to cope with cases where we re-order two outer joins, but it's possible to make it work without sacrificing that core principle. PlaceHolderVars receive similar decoration for the same reason. In the planner, we include these outer join bitmapsets into the relids that an expression is considered to depend on, and in consequence also add outer-join relids to the relids of join RelOptInfos. This allows us to correctly perceive whether an expression can be calculated above or below a particular outer join. This change affects FDWs that want to plan foreign joins. They *must* follow suit when labeling foreign joins in order to match with the core planner, but for many purposes (if postgres_fdw is any guide) they'd prefer to consider only base relations within the join. To support both requirements, redefine ForeignScan.fs_relids as base+OJ relids, and add a new field fs_base_relids that's set up by the core planner. Large though it is, this commit just does the minimum necessary to install the new mechanisms and get check-world passing again. Follow-up patches will perform some cleanup. (The README additions and comments mention some stuff that will appear in the follow-up.) Patch by me; thanks to Richard Guo for review. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected]
2023-01-02Update copyright for 2023Bruce Momjian
Backpatch-through: 11
2022-01-08Update copyright for 2022Bruce Momjian
Backpatch-through: 10
2021-01-21Fix pull_varnos' miscomputation of relids set for a PlaceHolderVar.Tom Lane
Previously, pull_varnos() took the relids of a PlaceHolderVar as being equal to the relids in its contents, but that fails to account for the possibility that we have to postpone evaluation of the PHV due to outer joins. This could result in a malformed plan. The known cases end up triggering the "failed to assign all NestLoopParams to plan nodes" sanity check in createplan.c, but other symptoms may be possible. The right value to use is the join level we actually intend to evaluate the PHV at. We can get that from the ph_eval_at field of the associated PlaceHolderInfo. However, there are some places that call pull_varnos() before the PlaceHolderInfos have been created; in that case, fall back to the conservative assumption that the PHV will be evaluated at its syntactic level. (In principle this might result in missing some legal optimization, but I'm not aware of any cases where it's an issue in practice.) Things are also a bit ticklish for calls occurring during deconstruct_jointree(), but AFAICS the ph_eval_at fields should have reached their final values by the time we need them. The main problem in making this work is that pull_varnos() has no way to get at the PlaceHolderInfos. We can fix that easily, if a bit tediously, in HEAD by passing it the planner "root" pointer. In the back branches that'd cause an unacceptable API/ABI break for extensions, so leave the existing entry points alone and add new ones with the additional parameter. (If an old entry point is called and encounters a PHV, it'll fall back to using the syntactic level, again possibly missing some valid optimization.) Back-patch to v12. The computation is surely also wrong before that, but it appears that we cannot reach a bad plan thanks to join order restrictions imposed on the subquery that the PlaceHolderVar came from. The error only became reachable when commit 4be058fe9 allowed trivial subqueries to be collapsed out completely, eliminating their join order restrictions. Per report from Stephan Springl. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected]
2021-01-02Update copyright for 2021Bruce Momjian
Backpatch-through: 9.5
2020-01-01Update copyrights for 2020Bruce Momjian
Backpatch-through: update all files in master, backpatch legal files through 9.4
2019-08-12Rationalize use of list_concat + list_copy combinations.Tom Lane
In the wake of commit 1cff1b95a, the result of list_concat no longer shares the ListCells of the second input. Therefore, we can replace "list_concat(x, list_copy(y))" with just "list_concat(x, y)". To improve call sites that were list_copy'ing the first argument, or both arguments, invent "list_concat_copy()" which produces a new list sharing no ListCells with either input. (This is a bit faster than "list_concat(list_copy(x), y)" because it makes the result list the right size to start with.) In call sites that were not list_copy'ing the second argument, the new semantics mean that we are usually leaking the second List's storage, since typically there is no remaining pointer to it. We considered inventing another list_copy variant that would list_free the second input, but concluded that for most call sites it isn't worth worrying about, given the relative compactness of the new List representation. (Note that in cases where such leakage would happen, the old code already leaked the second List's header; so we're only discussing the size of the leak not whether there is one. I did adjust two or three places that had been troubling to free that header so that they manually free the whole second List.) Patch by me; thanks to David Rowley for review. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected]
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
2019-01-29Refactor 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/[email protected]
2019-01-29Make some small planner API cleanups.Tom Lane
Move a few very simple node-creation and node-type-testing functions from the planner's clauses.c to nodes/makefuncs and nodes/nodeFuncs. There's nothing planner-specific about them, as evidenced by the number of other places that were using them. While at it, rename and_clause() etc to is_andclause() etc, to clarify that they are node-type-testing functions not node-creation functions. And use "static inline" implementations for the shortest ones. Also, modify flatten_join_alias_vars() and some subsidiary functions to take a Query not a PlannerInfo to define the join structure that Vars should be translated according to. They were only using the "parse" field of the PlannerInfo anyway, so this just requires removing one level of indirection. The advantage is that now parse_agg.c can use flatten_join_alias_vars() without the horrid kluge of creating an incomplete PlannerInfo, which will allow that file to be decoupled from relation.h in a subsequent patch. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected]
2019-01-02Update copyright for 2019Bruce Momjian
Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.4
2018-01-03Update copyright for 2018Bruce Momjian
Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.3
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/[email protected] Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected]
2017-06-21Phase 2 of pgindent updates.Tom Lane
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/[email protected] Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected]
2017-04-10Improve castNode notation by introducing list-extraction-specific variants.Tom Lane
This extends the castNode() notation introduced by commit 5bcab1114 to provide, in one step, extraction of a list cell's pointer and coercion to a concrete node type. For example, "lfirst_node(Foo, lc)" is the same as "castNode(Foo, lfirst(lc))". Almost half of the uses of castNode that have appeared so far include a list extraction call, so this is pretty widely useful, and it saves a few more keystrokes compared to the old way. As with the previous patch, back-patch the addition of these macros to pg_list.h, so that the notation will be available when back-patching. Patch by me, after an idea of Andrew Gierth's. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected]
2017-04-06Reset API of clause_selectivity()Simon Riggs
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f9yurJQW9pdnzL+rmOtsp2vOytkpXKGnMFJEO-qz5O5eA@mail.gmail.com
2017-04-05Collect and use multi-column dependency statsSimon Riggs
Follow on patch in the multi-variate statistics patch series. CREATE STATISTICS s1 WITH (dependencies) ON (a, b) FROM t; ANALYZE; will collect dependency stats on (a, b) and then use the measured dependency in subsequent query planning. Commit 7b504eb282ca2f5104b5c00b4f05a3ef6bb1385b added CREATE STATISTICS with n-distinct coefficients. These are now specified using the mutually exclusive option WITH (ndistinct). Author: Tomas Vondra, David Rowley Reviewed-by: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI, Álvaro Herrera, Dean Rasheed, Robert Haas and many other comments and contributions Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected]
2017-02-21Make more use of castNode()Peter Eisentraut
2017-01-18Improve RLS planning by marking individual quals with security levels.Tom Lane
In an RLS query, we must ensure that security filter quals are evaluated before ordinary query quals, in case the latter contain "leaky" functions that could expose the contents of sensitive rows. The original implementation of RLS planning ensured this by pushing the scan of a secured table into a sub-query that it marked as a security-barrier view. Unfortunately this results in very inefficient plans in many cases, because the sub-query cannot be flattened and gets planned independently of the rest of the query. To fix, drop the use of sub-queries to enforce RLS qual order, and instead mark each qual (RestrictInfo) with a security_level field establishing its priority for evaluation. Quals must be evaluated in security_level order, except that "leakproof" quals can be allowed to go ahead of quals of lower security_level, if it's helpful to do so. This has to be enforced within the ordering of any one list of quals to be evaluated at a table scan node, and we also have to ensure that quals are not chosen for early evaluation (i.e., use as an index qual or TID scan qual) if they're not allowed to go ahead of other quals at the scan node. This is sufficient to fix the problem for RLS quals, since we only support RLS policies on simple tables and thus RLS quals will always exist at the table scan level only. Eventually these qual ordering rules should be enforced for join quals as well, which would permit improving planning for explicit security-barrier views; but that's a task for another patch. Note that FDWs would need to be aware of these rules --- and not, for example, send an insecure qual for remote execution --- but since we do not yet allow RLS policies on foreign tables, the case doesn't arise. This will need to be addressed before we can allow such policies. Patch by me, reviewed by Stephen Frost and Dean Rasheed. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected]
2017-01-03Update copyright via script for 2017Bruce Momjian
2016-07-15Adjust spellings of forms of "cancel"Peter Eisentraut
2016-01-02Update copyright for 2016Bruce Momjian
Backpatch certain files through 9.1
2015-03-12Improve planner's cost estimation in the presence of semijoins.Tom Lane
If we have a semijoin, say SELECT * FROM x WHERE x1 IN (SELECT y1 FROM y) and we're estimating the cost of a parameterized indexscan on x, the number of repetitions of the indexscan should not be taken as the size of y; it'll really only be the number of distinct values of y1, because the only valid plan with y on the outside of a nestloop would require y to be unique-ified before joining it to x. Most of the time this doesn't make that much difference, but sometimes it can lead to drastically underestimating the cost of the indexscan and hence choosing a bad plan, as pointed out by David Kubečka. Fixing this is a bit difficult because parameterized indexscans are costed out quite early in the planning process, before we have the information that would be needed to call estimate_num_groups() and thereby estimate the number of distinct values of the join column(s). However we can move the code that extracts a semijoin RHS's unique-ification columns, so that it's done in initsplan.c rather than on-the-fly in create_unique_path(). That shouldn't make any difference speed-wise and it's really a bit cleaner too. The other bit of information we need is the size of the semijoin RHS, which is easy if it's a single relation (we make those estimates before considering indexscan costs) but problematic if it's a join relation. The solution adopted here is just to use the product of the sizes of the join component rels. That will generally be an overestimate, but since estimate_num_groups() only uses this input as a clamp, an overestimate shouldn't hurt us too badly. In any case we don't allow this new logic to produce a value larger than we would have chosen before, so that at worst an overestimate leaves us no wiser than we were before.
2015-01-06Update copyright for 2015Bruce Momjian
Backpatch certain files through 9.0
2014-09-09Preserve AND/OR flatness while extracting restriction OR clauses.Tom Lane
The code I added in commit f343a880d5555faf1dad0286c5632047c8f599ad was careless about preserving AND/OR flatness: it could create a structure with an OR node directly underneath another one. That breaks an assumption that's fairly important for planning efficiency, not to mention triggering various Asserts (as reported by Benjamin Smith). Add a trifle more logic to handle the case properly.
2014-05-06pgindent run for 9.4Bruce Momjian
This includes removing tabs after periods in C comments, which was applied to back branches, so this change should not effect backpatching.
2014-01-07Update copyright for 2014Bruce Momjian
Update all files in head, and files COPYRIGHT and legal.sgml in all back branches.
2013-12-30Extract restriction OR clauses whether or not they are indexable.Tom Lane
It's possible to extract a restriction OR clause from a join clause that has the form of an OR-of-ANDs, if each sub-AND includes a clause that mentions only one specific relation. While PG has been aware of that idea for many years, the code previously only did it if it could extract an indexable OR clause. On reflection, though, that seems a silly limitation: adding a restriction clause can be a win by reducing the number of rows that have to be filtered at the join step, even if we have to test the clause as a plain filter clause during the scan. This should be especially useful for foreign tables, where the change can cut the number of rows that have to be retrieved from the foreign server; but testing shows it can win even on local tables. Per a suggestion from Robert Haas. As a heuristic, I made the code accept an extracted restriction clause if its estimated selectivity is less than 0.9, which will probably result in accepting extracted clauses just about always. We might need to tweak that later based on experience. Since the code no longer has even a weak connection to Path creation, remove orindxpath.c and create a new file optimizer/util/orclauses.c. There's some additional janitorial cleanup of now-dead code that needs to happen, but it seems like that's a fit subject for a separate commit.