Re: BitmapHeapScan streaming read user and prelim refactoring
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BitmapHeapScan streaming read user and prelim refactoring |
Дата | |
Msg-id | abf05d48-cecc-4f5b-8645-f9119d88f557@iki.fi обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BitmapHeapScan streaming read user and prelim refactoring (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: BitmapHeapScan streaming read user and prelim refactoring
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 14/03/2024 12:55, Dilip Kumar wrote: > On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 4:07 PM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote: >> _SPI_execute_plan() has code to deal with the possibility that the >> active snapshot is not set. That seems fishy; do we really support SPI >> without any snapshot? I'm inclined to turn that into an error. I ran the >> regression tests with an "Assert(ActiveSnapshotSet())" there, and >> everything worked. > > IMHO, we can call SPI_Connect() and SPI_Execute() from any C > extension, so I don't think there we can guarantee that the snapshot > must be set, do we? I suppose, although the things you could do without a snapshot would be pretty limited. The query couldn't access any tables. Could it even look up functions in the parser? Not sure. > Maybe for now we can just handle this specific case to remove the > snapshot serializing for the BitmapHeapScan as you are doing in the > patch. After looking into the code your theory seems correct that we > are just copying the ActiveSnapshot while building the query > descriptor and from there we are copying into the Estate so logically > there should not be any reason for these two to be different. Ok, committed that for now. Thanks for looking! -- Heikki Linnakangas Neon (https://neon.tech)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: