From: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: moving extraUpdatedCols out of RangeTblEntry (into ModifyTable) |
Date: | 2023-01-05 13:53:36 |
Message-ID: | CA+HiwqE-v_1Cq5XVZWiuLTdiT_VNGZOs2jj0GjAyC3krCVSLAg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 4:59 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I wrote:
> > After further thought: maybe we should get radical and postpone this
> > work all the way to executor startup. The downside of that is having
> > to do it over again on each execution of a prepared plan. But the
> > upside is that when the UPDATE targets a many-partitioned table,
> > we would have a chance at not doing the work at all for partitions
> > that get pruned at runtime. I'm not sure if that win would emerge
> > immediately or if we still have executor work to do to manage pruning
> > of the target table. I'm also not sure that this'd be a net win
> > overall. But it seems worth considering.
>
> Here's a draft patch that does it like that. This seems like a win
> for more reasons than just pruning, because I was able to integrate
> the calculation into runtime setup of the expressions, so that we
> aren't doing an extra stringToNode() on them.
Thanks for the patch. This looks pretty neat and I agree that this
seems like a net win overall.
As an aside, I wonder why AttrDefault (and other things in
RelationData that need stringToNode() done on them to put into a Query
or a plan tree) doesn't store the expression Node tree to begin with?
> There's still a code path that does such a calculation at plan time
> (get_rel_all_updated_cols), but it's only used by postgres_fdw which
> has some other rather-inefficient behaviors in the same area.
>
> I've not looked into what it'd take to back-patch this. We can't
> add a field to ResultRelInfo in released branches (cf 4b3e37993),
> but we might be able to repurpose RangeTblEntry.extraUpdatedCols.
I think we can make that work. Would you like me to give that a try?
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2023-01-05 15:15:21 | Re: Allow tailoring of ICU locales with custom rules |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2023-01-05 13:52:18 | Re: heapgettup refactoring |