There are 2 problems with our early exit strategy that this commit fixes:
1- When we decide that a subplan results are sent to all worker nodes,
we used to skip traversing the whole distributed plan, instead of
skipping only the subplan.
2- We used to consider all available nodes in the cluster (secondaries
and inactive nodes as well as active primaries) when deciding on early
exit strategy. This resulted in failures to early exit when there are
secondaries or inactive nodes.
DESCRIPTION: Replace the query planner for the coordinator part with the postgres planner
Closes#2761
Citus had a simple rule based planner for the query executed on the query coordinator. This planner grew over time with the addigion of SQL support till it was getting close to the functionality of the postgres planner. Except the code was brittle and its complexity rose which made it hard to add new SQL support.
Given its resemblance with the postgres planner it was a long outstanding wish to replace our hand crafted planner with the well supported postgres planner. This patch replaces our planner with a call to postgres' planner.
Due to the functionality of the postgres planner we needed to support both projections and filters/quals on the citus custom scan node. When a sort operation is planned above the custom scan it might require fields to be reordered in the custom scan before returning the tuple (projection). The postgres planner assumes every custom scan node implements projections. Because we controlled the plan that was created we prevented reordering in the custom scan and never had implemented it before.
A same optimisation applies to having clauses that could have been where clauses. Instead of applying the filter as a having on the aggregate it will push it down into the plan which could reach a custom scan node.
For both filters and projections we have implemented them when tuples are read from the tuple store. If no projections or filters are required it will directly return the tuple from the tuple store. Otherwise it will loop tuples from the tuple store through the filter and projection until a tuple is found and returned.
Besides filters being pushed down a side effect of having quals that could have been a where clause is that a call to read intermediate result could be called before the first tuple is fetched from the custom scan. This failed because the intermediate result would only be pulled to the coordinator on the first tuple fetch. To overcome this problem we do run the distributed subplans now before we run the postgres executor. This ensures the intermediate result is present on the coordinator in time. We do account for total time instrumentation by removing the instrumentation before handing control to the psotgres executor and update the timings our self.
For future SQL support it is enough to create a valid query structure for the part of the query to be executed on the query coordinating node. As a utility we do serialise and print the query at debug level4 for engineers to inspect what kind of query is being planned on the query coordinator.
In this commit, we're introducing a way to prevent CTE inlining via a GUC.
The GUC is used in all the tests where PG 11 and PG 12 tests would diverge
otherwise.
Note that, in PG 12, the restriction information for CTEs are generated. It
means that for some queries involving CTEs, Citus planner (router planner/
pushdown planner) may behave differently. So, via the GUC, we prevent
tests to diverge on PG 11 vs PG 12.
When we drop PG 11 support, we should get rid of the GUC, and mark
relevant ctes as MATERIALIZED, which does the same thing.
In plain words, each distributed plan pulls the necessary intermediate
results to the worker nodes that the plan hits. This is primarily useful
in three ways.
(i) If the distributed plan that uses intermediate
result(s) is a router query, then the intermediate results are only
broadcasted to a single node.
(ii) If a distributed plan consists of only intermediate results, which
is not uncommon, the intermediate results are broadcasted to a single
node only.
(iii) If a distributed query hits a sub-set of the shards in multiple
workers, the intermediate results will be broadcasted to the relevant
node(s).
The final item (iii) becomes crucial for append/range distributed
tables where typically the distributed queries hit a small subset of
shards/workers.
To do this, for each query that Citus creates a distributed plan, we keep
track of the subPlans used in the queryTree, and save it in the distributed
plan. Just before Citus executes each subPlan, Citus first keeps track of
every worker node that the distributed plan hits, and marks every subPlan
should be broadcasted to these nodes. Later, for each subPlan which is a
distributed plan, Citus does this operation recursively since these
distributed plans may access to different subPlans, and those have to be
recorded as well.
Marco Slot
Hanefi Onaldi
Nils Dijk
Onder Kalaci
Hanefi Onaldi