Re: Defer selection of asynchronous subplans until the executor initialization stage
От | Zhihong Yu |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Defer selection of asynchronous subplans until the executor initialization stage |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CALNJ-vTdGQ-AAM8k7DxAdADYVRFR3FOiyb9ZshkWwyYq2-nQew@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Defer selection of asynchronous subplans until the executor initialization stage (Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Defer selection of asynchronous subplans until the executor initialization stage
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Apr 10, 2022 at 7:41 PM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 10, 2022 at 07:43:48PM +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 1:58 AM Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 9:43 PM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
> > > This patch seems to be causing the planner to crash.
> > > Here's a query reduced from sqlsmith.
> > >
> > > | explain SELECT 1 FROM information_schema.constraint_column_usage WHERE 1 <= pg_trigger_depth();
> > >
> > > Program terminated with signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
> >
> > Reproduced. Will look into this.
>
> I think the cause of this is that mark_async_capable_plan() failed to
> take into account that when the given path is a SubqueryScanPath or
> ForeignPath, the given corresponding plan might include a gating
> Result node that evaluates pseudoconstant quals. My oversight. :-(
> Attached is a patch for fixing that. I think v14 has the same issue,
> so I think we need backpatching.
Thanks - this seems to resolve the issue.
On Sun, Apr 10, 2022 at 06:46:25AM -0700, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> Looking at the second hunk of the patch:
> FdwRoutine *fdwroutine = path->parent->fdwroutine;
> ...
> + if (IsA(plan, Result))
> + return false;
>
> It seems the check of whether plan is a Result node can be lifted ahead of
> the switch statement (i.e. to the beginning of mark_async_capable_plan).
>
> This way, we don't have to check for every case in the switch statement.
I think you misread it - the other branch says: if (*not* IsA())
No, I didn't misread:
if (!IsA(plan, Result) &&
mark_async_capable_plan(plan,
((ProjectionPath *) path)->subpath))
return true;
return false;
mark_async_capable_plan(plan,
((ProjectionPath *) path)->subpath))
return true;
return false;
If the plan is Result node, false would be returned.
So the check can be lifted to the beginning of the func.
Cheers
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: