Support for ARRAY[] expressions is limited to having a consistent shape,
eg ARRAY[(int,text),(int,text)] as opposed to ARRAY[(int,text),(float,text)] or ARRAY[(int,text),(int,text,float)]
This change was actually already intended in #3124. However, the
postgres Makefile manually enables this warning too. This way we undo
that.
To confirm that it works two functions were changed to make use of not
having the warning anymore.
Areas for further optimization:
- Don't save subquery results to a local file on the coordinator when the subquery is not in the having clause
- Push the the HAVING with subquery to the workers if there's a group by on the distribution column
- Don't push down the results to the workers when we don't push down the HAVING clause, only the coordinator needs it
Fixes#520Fixes#756Closes#2047
Pushing down limit and order by into workers may produce
wrong output when distinct on() clause has expressions,
aggregates, or window functions.
This checking allows pushing down of limits only if
distinct clause is a superset of group by clause. i.e. it contains all clauses in group by.
We push down order by to worker query when limit is specified
(with some other additional checks). If the query has an expression
on an aggregate or avg aggregate by itself, and there is an order
by on this particular target we may send wrong order by to worker
query with potential to affect query result.
The fix creates a auxilary target entry in the worker query and
uses that target entry for sorting.
Before this PR, we were trusting on the columns of group by about
guaranteeing the uniqueness of the results. However, this assumption
is correct only if the columns in the group by is subset of columns
in the distinct clause. It can be wrong if we have part of group by
columns and some aggregation columns in the distinct clause. With
this PR, we add distinct plan on top of aggregate plan when necessary.
Expands count distinct coverage by allowing more cases. We used to support
count distinct only if we can push down distinct aggregate to worker query
i.e. the count distinct clause was on the partition column of the table,
or there was a grouping on the partition column.
Now we can support
- non-partition columns, with or without grouping on partition column
- partition, and non partition column in the same query
- having clause
- single table subqueries
- insert into select queries
- join queries where count distinct is on partition, or non-partition column
- filters on count distinct clauses (extends existing support)
We first try to push down aggregate to worker query (original case), if we
can't then we modify worker query to return distinct columns to coordinator
node. We do that by adding distinct column targets to group by clauses. Then
we perform count distinct operation on the coordinator node.
This work should reduce the cases where HLL is used as it can address anything
that HLL can. However, if we start having performance issues due to very large
number rows, then we can recommend hll use.
Custom Scan is a node in the planned statement which helps external providers
to abstract data scan not just for foreign data wrappers but also for regular
relations so you can benefit your version of caching or hardware optimizations.
This sounds like only an abstraction on the data scan layer, but we can use it
as an abstraction for our distributed queries. The only thing we need to do is
to find distributable parts of the query, plan for them and replace them with
a Citus Custom Scan. Then, whenever PostgreSQL hits this custom scan node in
its Vulcano style execution, it will call our callback functions which run
distributed plan and provides tuples to the upper node as it scans a regular
relation. This means fewer code changes, fewer bugs and more supported features
for us!
First, in the distributed query planner phase, we create a Custom Scan which
wraps the distributed plan. For real-time and task-tracker executors, we add
this custom plan under the master query plan. For router executor, we directly
pass the custom plan because there is not any master query. Then, we simply let
the PostgreSQL executor run this plan. When it hits the custom scan node, we
call the related executor parts for distributed plan, fill the tuple store in
the custom scan and return results to PostgreSQL executor in Vulcano style,
a tuple per XXX_ExecScan() call.
* Modify planner to utilize Custom Scan node.
* Create different scan methods for different executors.
* Use native PostgreSQL Explain for master part of queries.
Adds support for PostgreSQL 9.6 by copying in the requisite ruleutils
file and refactoring the out/readfuncs code to flexibly support the
old-style copy/pasted out/readfuncs (prior to 9.6) or use extensible
node APIs (in 9.6 and higher).
Most version-specific code within this change is only needed to set new
fields in the AggRef nodes we build for aggregations. Version-specific
test output files were added in certain cases, though in most they were
not necessary. Each such file begins by e.g. printing the major version
in order to clarify its purpose.
The comment atop citus_nodes.h details how to add support for new nodes
for when that becomes necessary.
This commit completes having support in Citus by adding having support for
real-time and task-tracker executors. Multiple tests are added to regression
tests to cover new supported queries with having support.
count_agg_clause *adds* the cost of the aggregates to the state
variable, it doesn't reinitialize it. That is intentional, as it is used
to incrementally add costs in some places.
This commit enables to create different worker and master temporary folders.
This change is important for citus-mx on task-tracker execution. In simple words,
on citus-mx, the worker could actually be reponsible for the master tasks as well.
Prior to this change, both master and worker logic on task-tracker executor was
accessing and using the same files for different purposes which was dangerous on
certain cases (i.e., when task_tracker_delay is low).
Fixes#394
This change adds LIMIT/OFFSET support for non router-plannable
distributed queries.
In cases that we can push the LIMIT down, we add the OFFSET value to
that LIMIT in the worker queries. When a query with LIMIT x OFFSET y is issued,
the query is propagated to the workers as LIMIT (x+y) OFFSET 0, and on the
master table, the original LIMIT and OFFSET values are used. With this change,
we can use OFFSET wherever we can use LIMIT.
Philip Dubé
Jelte Fennema
SaitTalhaNisanci
velioglu
Murat Tuncer
metdos
Marco Slot
Murat Tuncer
Andres Freund
Onder Kalaci
Eren
Jason Petersen