Re: Fix BUG #17335: Duplicate result rows in Gather node
От | Yura Sokolov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Fix BUG #17335: Duplicate result rows in Gather node |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 382c3b52071a087fd4357e22959b3ddb05e524b7.camel@postgrespro.ru обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Fix BUG #17335: Duplicate result rows in Gather node (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Fix BUG #17335: Duplicate result rows in Gather node
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
В Чт, 20/01/2022 в 09:32 +1300, David Rowley пишет: > On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 at 00:14, Yura Sokolov <y.sokolov@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > > Suggested quick (and valid) fix in the patch attached: > > - If Append has single child, then copy its parallel awareness. > > I've been looking at this and I've gone through changing my mind about > what's the right fix quite a number of times. > > My current thoughts are that I don't really like the fact that we can > have plans in the following shape: > > Finalize Aggregate > -> Gather > Workers Planned: 1 > -> Partial Aggregate > -> Parallel Hash Left Join > Hash Cond: (gather_append_1.fk = gather_append_2.fk) > -> Index Scan using gather_append_1_ix on gather_append_1 > Index Cond: (f = true) > -> Parallel Hash > -> Parallel Seq Scan on gather_append_2 > > It's only made safe by the fact that Gather will only use 1 worker. > To me, it just seems too fragile to assume that's always going to be > the case. I feel like this fix just relies on the fact that > create_gather_path() and create_gather_merge_path() do > "pathnode->num_workers = subpath->parallel_workers;". If someone > decided that was to work a different way, then we risk this breaking > again. Additionally, today we have Gather and GatherMerge, but we may > one day end up with more node types that gather results from parallel > workers, or even a completely different way of executing plans. It seems strange parallel_aware and parallel_safe flags neither affect execution nor are properly checked. Except parallel_safe is checked in ExecSerializePlan which is called from ExecInitParallelPlan, which is called from ExecGather and ExecGatherMerge. But looks like this check doesn't affect execution as well. > > I think a safer way to fix this is to just not remove the > Append/MergeAppend node if the parallel_aware flag of the only-child > and the Append/MergeAppend don't match. I've done that in the > attached. > > I believe the code at the end of add_paths_to_append_rel() can remain as is. I found clean_up_removed_plan_level also called from set_subqueryscan_references. Is there a need to patch there as well? And there is strange state: - in the loop by subpaths, pathnode->node.parallel_safe is set to AND of all its subpath's parallel_safe (therefore there were need to copy it in my patch version), - that means, our AppendPath is parallel_aware but not parallel_safe. It is ridiculous a bit. And it is strange AppendPath could have more parallel_workers than sum of its children parallel_workers. So it looks like whole machinery around parallel_aware/parallel_safe has no enough consistency. Either way, I attach you version of fix with my tests as new patch version. regards, Yura Sokolov
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: