Now that we will soon add another table type having DISTRIBUTE_BY_NONE
as distribution method and that we want the code to interpret such
tables mostly as distributed tables, let's make the definition of those
other two table types more strict by removing
CITUS_TABLE_WITH_NO_DIST_KEY
macro.
And instead, use HasDistributionKey() check in the places where the
logic applies to all table types that have / don't have a distribution
key. In future PRs, we might want to convert some of those
HasDistributionKey() checks if logic only applies to Citus local /
reference tables, not the others.
And adding HasDistributionKey() also allows us to consider having
DISTRIBUTE_BY_NONE as the distribution method as a "table attribute"
that can apply to distributed tables too, rather something that
determines the table type.
Attribute number in a subquery RTE and relation RTE means different
things. In a relation attribute number will point to the column number
in the table definition including the dropped columns as well however in
subquery, it means the index in the target list. When we convert a
relation RTE to subquery RTE we should either correct all the relevant
attribute numbers or we can just add a dummy column for the dropped
columns. We choose the latter in this commit because it is practically
too vulnerable to update all the vars in a query.
Another thing this commit fixes is that in case a join restriction
clause list contains a false clause, we should just returns a false
clause instead of the whole list, because the whole list will contain
restrictions from other RTEs as well and this breaks the query, which
can be seen from the output changes, now it is much simpler.
Also instead of adding single tests for dropped columns, we choose to
run the whole mixed queries with tables with dropped columns, this
revealed some bugs already, which are fixed in this commit.
Instead of sending NULL's over a network, we now convert the subqueries
in the form of:
SELECT t.a, NULL, NULL FROM (SELECT a FROM table)t;
And we recursively plan the inner part so that we don't send the NULL's
over network. We still need the NULLs in the outer subquery because we
currently don't have an easy way of updating all the necessary places in
the query.
Add some documentation for how the conversion is done
The logical planner cannot handle joins between local and distributed table.
Instead, we can recursively plan one side of the join and let the logical
planner handle the rest.
Our algorithm is a little smart, trying not to recursively plan distributed
tables, but favors local tables.
Introduce table entry utility functions
Citus table cache entry utilities are introduced so that we can easily
extend existing functionality with minimum changes, specifically changes
to these functions. For example IsNonDistributedTableCacheEntry can be
extended for citus local tables without the need to scan the whole
codebase and update each relevant part.
* Introduce utility functions to find the type of tables
A table type can be a reference table, a hash/range/append distributed
table. Utility methods are created so that we don't have to worry about
how a table is considered as a reference table etc. This also makes it
easy to extend the table types.
* Add IsCitusTableType utilities
* Rename IsCacheEntryCitusTableType -> IsCitusTableTypeCacheEntry
* Change citus table types in some checks
FindNodeCheck is not clear about what the function is doing. They are
renamed to FindNodeMatchingCheckFunctionXXX. Also for choosing elements in these
functions, CheckNodeFunc type is introduced.
In the code, we had the assumption that if restriction information
is NULL, it means that we cannot have any disributetd tables in
the subquery.
However, for subqueries in WHERE clause, that is not the case when
the subquery is ANDed with FALSE. In that case, Citus operates
on the originalQuery (which doesn't go through the standard_planner()),
and rely on the restriction information generated by standard_plannner().
As Postgres is smart enough to no generate restriction information for
subqueries ANDed with FALSE, we hit the assertion.
The rule for infinite recursion is the following:
- If the query contains a subquery which is recursively planned, and
no other subqueries can be recursively planned due to correlation
(e.g., LATERAL joins), the planner keeps recursing again and again.
One interesting thing here is that even if a subquery contains only intermediate
result(s), we re-recursively plan that. In the end, the logic in the code does the following:
- Try recursive planning any of the subqueries in the query tree
- If any subquery is recursively planned, call the planner again
where the subquery is replaced with the intermediate result.
- Try recursively planning any of the queries
- If any subquery is recursively planned, call the planner again
where the subquery (in this case it is already intermediate result)
is replaced with the intermediate result.
- Try recursively planning any of the queries
- If any subquery is recursively planned, call the planner again
where the subquery (in this case it is already intermediate result)
is replaced with the intermediate result.
- Try recursively planning any of the queries
- If any subquery is recursively planned, call the planner again
where the subquery (in this case it is already intermediate result)
is replaced with the intermediate result.
......
With #1804 (and related PRs), Citus gained the ability to
plan subqueries that are not safe to pushdown.
There are two high-level requirements for pushing down subqueries:
* Individual subqueries that require a merge step (i.e., GROUP BY
on non-distribution key, or LIMIT in the subquery etc). We've
handled such subqueries via #1876.
* Combination of subqueries that are not joined on distribution keys.
This commit aims to recursively plan some of such subqueries to make
the whole query safe to pushdown.
The main logic behind non colocated subquery joins is that we pick
an anchor range table entry and check for distribution key equality
of any other subqueries in the given query. If for a given subquery,
we cannot find distribution key equality with the anchor rte, we
recursively plan that subquery.
We also used a hacky solution for picking relations as the anchor range
table entries. The hack is that we wrap them into a subquery. This is only
necessary since some of the attribute equivalance checks are based on
queries rather than range table entries.
Onur Tirtir
SaitTalhaNisanci
Philip Dubé
Onder Kalaci
Philip Dubé
Jelte Fennema
Onder Kalaci