Re: Use %u to print user mapping's umid and userid

From: Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Use %u to print user mapping's umid and userid
Date: 2016-05-12 04:18:43
Message-ID: 79e7c60c-9f89-2d57-dbdc-6d68f9111f39@lab.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2016/05/12 13:02, Tom Lane wrote:
> Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
>> On 2016/05/11 18:03, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>>> A call to GetForeignTable would incur a catalog lookup which means a
>>> catalog table/index scan if corresponding entry is not in the cache.
>>> This is followed by GetUserMapping() which is another catalog access.
>>> That's bound to be expensive than an makeOid(), oidVal() call.

>> Right, but such lookups have been incurred at the planning time (ie,
>> build_simple_rel), and corresponding entries would be in the cache. So,
>> the overhead in that recalculation at the execution time would be not
>> that large in practice. No?

> It's a mistake to assume that execution immediately follows planning.

Yeah, that would not be the case in PREPARE/EXECUTE, right?

> Having said that, I wonder whether you should be thinking less about
> performance and more about correctness. Is a user mapping lookup done
> at plan time still valid at execution, and if so what ensures that?

I think if scanning a foreign join, the user mapping is still valid at
execution, and that is ensured by RevalidateChachedQuery, IIUC.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2016-05-12 05:49:32 Re: Academic help for Postgres
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-05-12 04:02:13 Re: Use %u to print user mapping's umid and userid