We should not recursively plan an already routable plannable query. An
example of this is (SELECT * FROM local JOIN (SELECT * FROM dist) d1
USING(a));
So we let the recursive planner do all of its work and at the end we
convert the final query to to handle unsupported joins. While doing each
conversion, we check if it is router plannable, if so we stop.
Only consider range table entries that are in jointree
If a range table is not in jointree then there is no point in
considering that because we are trying to convert range table entries to
subqueries for join use case.
Check equality in quals
We want to recursively plan distributed tables only if they have an
equality filter on a unique column. So '>' and '<' operators will not
trigger recursive planning of distributed tables in local-distributed
table joins.
Recursively plan distributed table only if the filter is constant
If the filter is not a constant then the join might return multiple rows
and there is a chance that the distributed table will return huge data.
Hence if the filter is not constant we choose to recursively plan the
local table.
When doing local-distributed table joins we convert one of them to
subquery. The current policy is that we convert distributed tables to
subquery if it has a unique index on a column that has unique
index(primary key also has a unique index).
UPDATEs on partitioned tables that affect only row partitions should
succeed, the rest should fail.
Also rename CStoreScan to ColumnarScan to make the error message more
relevant.
When Citus needs to parallelize queries on the local node (e.g., the node
executing the distributed query and the shards are the same), we need to
be mindful about the connection management. The reason is that the client
backends that are running distributed queries are competing with the client
backends that Citus initiates to parallelize the queries in order to get
a slot on the max_connections.
In that regard, we implemented a "failover" mechanism where if the distributed
queries cannot get a connection, the execution failovers the tasks to the local
execution.
The failover logic is follows:
- As the connection manager if it is OK to get a connection
- If yes, we are good.
- If no, we fail the workerPool and the failure triggers
the failover of the tasks to local execution queue
The decision of getting a connection is follows:
/*
* For local nodes, solely relying on citus.max_shared_pool_size or
* max_connections might not be sufficient. The former gives us
* a preview of the future (e.g., we let the new connections to establish,
* but they are not established yet). The latter gives us the close to
* precise view of the past (e.g., the active number of client backends).
*
* Overall, we want to limit both of the metrics. The former limit typically
* kics in under regular loads, where the load of the database increases in
* a reasonable pace. The latter limit typically kicks in when the database
* is issued lots of concurrent sessions at the same time, such as benchmarks.
*/
When distributing a columnar table, as well as changing options on a distributed columnar table, this patch will forward the settings from the coordinator to the workers.
For propagating options changes on an already distributed table this change is pretty straight forward. Before applying the change in options locally we will create a `DDLJob` that contains a call to `alter_columnar_table_set(...)` for every shard placement with all settings of the current table. This goes both for setting an option as well as resetting. This will reset the values to the defaults configured on the coordinator. Having the effect that the coordinator is authoritative on the settings and makes sure the shards have the same settings set as the table on the coordinator.
When a columnar table is distributed it is using the `TableDDLCommand` infra structure to create a new kind of `TableDDLCommand`. This new type, called a `TableDDLCommandFunction` contains a context and 2 function pointers to execute. One function returns the command as applied on the table, the second function will return the sql command to apply to a shard with a given shard id. The schema name is ignored as it will use the fully qualified name of the shard in the same schema as the base table.
Multi-row execution already uses sequential execution. When shards
are local, using local execution is profitable as it avoids
an extra connection establishment to the local node.
Columnar options were by accident linked to the relfilenode instead of the regclass/relation oid. This PR moves everything related to columnar options to their own catalog table.
Considering the adaptive connection management
improvements that we plan to roll soon, it makes it
very helpful to know the number of active client
backends.
We are doing this addition to simplify yhe adaptive connection
management for single node Citus. In single node Citus, both the
client backends and Citus parallel queries would compete to get
slots on Postgres' `max_connections` on the same Citus database.
With adaptive connection management, we have the counters for
Citus parallel queries. That helps us to adaptively decide
on the remote executions pool size (e.g., throttle connections
if necessary).
However, we do not have any counters for the total number of
client backends on the database. For single node Citus, we
should consider all the client backends, not only the remote
connections that Citus does.
Of course Postgres internally knows how many client
backends are active. However, to get that number Postgres
iterates over all the backends. For examaple, see [pg_stat_get_db_numbackends](8e90ec5580/src/backend/utils/adt/pgstatfuncs.c (L1240))
where Postgres iterates over all the backends.
For our purpuses, we need this information on every connection
establishment. That's why we cannot affort to do this kind of
iterattion.
* Move local execution after the remote execution
Before this commit, when both local and remote tasks
exist, the executor was starting the execution with
local execution. There is no strict requirements on
this.
Especially considering the adaptive connection management
improvements that we plan to roll soon, moving the local
execution after to the remote execution makes more sense.
The adaptive connection management for single node Citus
would look roughly as follows:
- Try to connect back to the coordinator for running
parallel queries.
- If succeeds, go on and execute tasks in parallel
- If fails, fallback to the local execution
So, we'll use local execution as a fallback mechanism. And,
moving it after to the remote execution allows us to implement
such further scenarios.
Before this commit, we let AdaptiveExecutorPreExecutorRun()
to be effective multiple times on every FETCH on cursors.
That does not affect the correctness of the query results,
but adds significant overhead.
Sait Talha Nisanci
Onder Kalaci
Marco Slot
Hadi Moshayedi
jeff-davis
Jeff Davis
Ahmet Gedemenli
Hadi Moshayedi
Nils Dijk
Halil Ozan Akgül
Önder Kalacı