confusing / inefficient "need_transcoding" handling in copy

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Andres Freund
Тема confusing / inefficient "need_transcoding" handling in copy
Дата
Msg-id 20240206020504.edijzczkgd25ek6z@awork3.anarazel.de
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответы Re: confusing / inefficient "need_transcoding" handling in copy  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Hi,

Looking at the profiles in [1], and similar profiles locally, made me wonder
why a basic COPY TO shows pg_server_to_any() and the strlen() to compute the
length of the to-be-converted string so heavily in profiles. Example
profile, for [2]:

-   88.11%    12.02%  postgres      postgres          [.] CopyOneRowTo
   - 76.09% CopyOneRowTo
      - 37.24% CopyAttributeOutText
         + 14.25% __strlen_evex
         + 2.76% pg_server_to_any
         + 0.03% 0xffffffff82a00c86
      + 31.82% OutputFunctionCall
      + 2.98% CopySendEndOfRow
      + 2.75% appendBinaryStringInfo
      + 0.58% MemoryContextReset
      + 0.02% 0xffffffff82a00c86
   + 12.01% standard_ExecutorRun
   + 0.02% PostgresMain

In the basic cases the client and server encoding should be the same after
all, so why do we need to do any conversion?

The code has a comment about this:

    /*
     * Set up encoding conversion info.  Even if the file and server encodings
     * are the same, we must apply pg_any_to_server() to validate data in
     * multibyte encodings.
     */
    cstate->need_transcoding =
        (cstate->file_encoding != GetDatabaseEncoding() ||
         pg_database_encoding_max_length() > 1);

I don't really understand why we need to validate anything during COPY TO?
Which is good, because it turns out that we don't actually validate anything,
as pg_server_to_any() returns without doing anything if the encoding matches:

    if (encoding == DatabaseEncoding->encoding ||
        encoding == PG_SQL_ASCII)
        return unconstify(char *, s);    /* assume data is valid */

This means that the strlen() we do in the call do pg_server_to_any(), which on
its own takes 14.25% of the cycles, computes something that will never be
used.


Unsurprisingly, only doing transcoding when encodings differ yields a sizable
improvement, about 18% for [2].


I haven't yet dug into the code history. One guess is that this should only
have been set this way for COPY FROM.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ZcGE8LrjGW8pmtOf%40paquier.xyz
[2] COPY (SELECT
1::int2,2::int2,3::int2,4::int2,5::int2,6::int2,7::int2,8::int2,9::int2,10::int2,11::int2,12::int2,13::int2,14::int2,15::int2,16::int2,17::int2,18::int2,19::int2,20::int2,
generate_series(1,1000000::int4)) TO '/dev/null';
 



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations
Следующее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations