From: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jacob Champion <jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: generic plans and "initial" pruning |
Date: | 2023-01-20 07:19:08 |
Message-ID: | CA+HiwqEnEYzaOsEbCEmSjCm7sf3yk4BsetgAOuTyZDRnEDEcqA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 12:58 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 12:31 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> It might be possible to incorporate this pointer into PlannedStmt
> >> instead of passing it separately.
>
> > Yeah, that would be less churn. Though, I wonder if you still hold
> > that PlannedStmt should not be scribbled upon outside the planner as
> > you said upthread [1]?
>
> Well, the whole point of that rule is that the executor can't modify
> a plancache entry. If the plancache itself sets a field in such an
> entry, that doesn't seem problematic from here.
>
> But there's other possibilities if that bothers you; QueryDesc
> could hold the field, for example. Also, I bet we'd want to copy
> it into EState for the main initialization recursion.
QueryDesc sounds good to me, and yes, also a copy in EState in any case.
So I started looking at the call sites of CreateQueryDesc() and
stopped to look at ExecParallelGetQueryDesc(). AFAICS, we wouldn't
need to pass the CachedPlan to a parallel worker's rerun of
InitPlan(), because 1) it doesn't make sense to call the plancache in
a parallel worker, 2) the leader should already have taken all the
locks in necessary for executing a given plan subnode that it intends
to pass to a worker in ExecInitGather(). Does that make sense?
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com | 2023-01-20 07:19:28 | RE: Logical replication timeout problem |
Previous Message | wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com | 2023-01-20 07:18:21 | RE: Logical replication timeout problem |