Re: Rethinking plpgsql's assignment implementation

út 15. 12. 2020 v 21:18 odesílatel Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> napsal:

> I realized that the speedup patch I posted yesterday is flawed: it's
> too aggressive about applying the R/W param mechanism, instead of
> not aggressive enough.
>
> To review, the point of that logic is that if we have an assignment
> like
> arrayvar := array_append(arrayvar, some-scalar-expression);
> a naive implementation would have array_append construct an entire
> new array, which we'd then have to copy into plpgsql's variable
> storage. Instead, if the array variable is in expanded-array
> format (which plpgsql encourages it to be) then we can pass the
> array parameter as a "read/write expanded datum", which array_append
> recognizes as license to scribble right on its input and return the
> modified input; that takes only O(1) time not O(N). Then plpgsql's
> assignment code notices that the expression result datum is the same
> pointer already stored in the variable, so it does nothing.
>
> With the patch at hand, a subscripted assignment a[i] := x becomes,
> essentially,
> a := subscriptingref(a, i, x);
> and we need to make the same sort of transformation to allow
> array_set_element to scribble right on the original value of "a"
> instead of making a copy.
>
> However, we can't simply not consider the source expression "x",
> as I proposed yesterday. For example, if we have
> a := subscriptingref(a, i, f(array_append(a, x)));
> it's not okay for array_append() to scribble on "a". The R/W
> param mechanism normally disallows any additional references to
> the target variable, which would prevent this error, but I broke
> that safety check with the 0007 patch.
>
> After thinking about this awhile, I decided that plpgsql's R/W param
> mechanism is really misdesigned. Instead of requiring the assignment
> source expression to be such that *all* its references to the target
> variable could be passed as R/W, we really want to identify *one*
> reference to the target variable to be passed as R/W, allowing any other
> ones to be passed read/only as they would be by default. As long as the
> R/W reference is a direct argument to the top-level (hence last to be
> executed) function in the expression, there is no harm in R/O references
> being passed to other lower parts of the expression. Nor is there any
> use-case for more than one argument of the top-level function being R/W.
>
> So the attached rewrite of the 0007 patch reimplements that logic to
> identify one single Param that references the target variable, and
> make only that Param pass a read/write reference, not any other
> Params referencing the target variable. This is a good change even
> without considering the assignment-reimplementation proposal, because
> even before this patchset we could have cases like
> arrayvar := array_append(arrayvar, arrayvar[i]);
> The existing code would be afraid to optimize this, but it's in fact
> safe.
>
> I also re-attach the 0001-0006 patches, which have not changed, just
> to keep the cfbot happy.
>
>
I run some performance tests and it looks very well.

regards, tom lane
>
>