Re: sqlsmith crash incremental sort
От | Richard Guo |
---|---|
Тема | Re: sqlsmith crash incremental sort |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAMbWs48HF9f=g+jSmmYBnWub9+Wyg5Xh-FoqAnvqAspue5ypAw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: sqlsmith crash incremental sort (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: sqlsmith crash incremental sort
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 6:59 AM Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
I've pushed fix with the DEFAULT_NUM_DISTINCT. The input comes from a
set operation (which is where we call generate_append_tlist), so it's
probably fairly unique, so maybe we should use input_tuples. But it's
not guaranteed, so DEFAULT_NUM_DISTINCT seems reasonably defensive.
Thanks for the fix. Verified that the crash has been fixed.
One detail I've changed is that instead of matching the expression
directly to a Var, it now calls pull_varnos() to also detect Vars
somewhere deeper. Lookig at examine_variable() it calls find_base_rel
for such case too, but I haven't tried constructing a query triggering
the issue.
A minor comment is that I don't think we need to strip relabel
explicitly before calling pull_varnos(), because this function would
recurse into T_RelabelType nodes.
Also do we need to call bms_free(varnos) for each pathkey here to avoid
waste of memory?
explicitly before calling pull_varnos(), because this function would
recurse into T_RelabelType nodes.
Also do we need to call bms_free(varnos) for each pathkey here to avoid
waste of memory?
One improvement I can think of is handling lists with only some
expressions containing varno 0. We could still call estimate_num_groups
for expressions with varno != 0, and multiply that by the estimate for
the other part (be it DEFAULT_NUM_DISTINCT). This might produce a higher
estimate than just using DEFAULT_NUM_DISTINCT directly, resulting in a
lower incremenal sort cost. But it's not clear to me if this can even
happen - AFAICS either all Vars have varno 0 or none, so I haven't done
this.
I don't think this case would happen either.
Thanks
Richard
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: