The idea behind this patch is to make it possible to run individual
test scripts without running the entire core test suite. Making all
the scripts completely independent would involve a massive rewrite,
and would probably be worse for coverage of things like concurrent DDL.
So this patch just does what seems practical with limited changes.
The net effect is that any test script can be run after running
limited earlier dependencies:
* all scripts depend on test_setup
* many scripts depend on create_index
* other dependencies are few in number, and are documented in
the parallel_schedule file.
To accomplish this, I chose a small number of commonly-used tables
and moved their creation and filling into test_setup. Later scripts
are expected not to modify these tables' data contents, for fear of
affecting other scripts' results. Also, our former habit of declaring
all C functions in one place is now gone in favor of declaring them
where they're used, if that's just one script, or in test_setup if
necessary.
There's more that could be done to remove some of the remaining
inter-script dependencies, but significantly more-invasive changes
would be needed, and at least for now it doesn't seem worth it.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1114748.1640383217@sss.pgh.pa.us
Although select_common_type() has a failure-return convention, an
apparent successful return just provides a type OID that *might* work
as a common supertype; we've not validated that the required casts
actually exist. In the mainstream use-cases that doesn't matter,
because we'll proceed to invoke coerce_to_common_type() on each input,
which will fail appropriately if the proposed common type doesn't
actually work. However, a few callers didn't read the (nonexistent)
fine print, and thought that if they got back a nonzero OID then the
coercions were sure to work.
This affects in particular the recently-added "anycompatible"
polymorphic types; we might think that a function/operator using
such types matches cases it really doesn't. A likely end result
of that is unexpected "ambiguous operator" errors, as for example
in bug #17387 from James Inform. Another, much older, case is that
the parser might try to transform an "x IN (list)" construct to
a ScalarArrayOpExpr even when the list elements don't actually have
a common supertype.
It doesn't seem desirable to add more checking to select_common_type
itself, as that'd just slow down the mainstream use-cases. Instead,
write a separate function verify_common_type that performs the
missing checks, and add a call to that where necessary. Likewise add
verify_common_type_from_oids to go with select_common_type_from_oids.
Back-patch to v13 where the "anycompatible" types came in. (The
symptom complained of in bug #17387 doesn't appear till v14, but
that's just because we didn't get around to converting || to use
anycompatible till then.) In principle the "x IN (list)" fix could
go back all the way, but I'm not currently convinced that it makes
much difference in real-world cases, so I won't bother for now.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17387-5dfe54b988444963@postgresql.org
Fix the code changed by commit 5c056b0c2 so that we always generate
RelabelType, not something else, for a cast to unspecified typmod.
Otherwise planner optimizations might not happen.
It appears we missed this point because the previous experiments were
done on type numeric: the parser undesirably generates a call on the
numeric() length-coercion function, but then numeric_support()
optimizes that down to a RelabelType, so that everything seems fine.
It misbehaves for types that have a non-optimized length coercion
function, such as bpchar.
Per report from John Naylor. Back-patch to all supported branches,
as the previous patch eventually was. Unfortunately, that no longer
includes 9.6 ... we really shouldn't put this type of change into a
nearly-EOL branch.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFBsxsEfbFHEkouc+FSj+3K1sHipLPbEC67L0SAe-9-da8QtYg@mail.gmail.com
Casting a value that's already of a type with a specific typmod
to an unspecified typmod doesn't do anything so far as run-time
behavior is concerned. However, it really ought to change the
exposed type of the expression to match. Up to now,
coerce_type_typmod hasn't bothered with that, which creates gotchas
in contexts such as recursive unions. If for example one side of
the union is numeric(18,3), but it needs to be plain numeric to
match the other side, there's no direct way to express that.
This is easy enough to fix, by inserting a RelabelType to update the
exposed type of the expression. However, it's a bit nervous-making
to change this behavior, because it's stood for a really long time.
(I strongly suspect that it's like this in part because the logic
pre-dates the introduction of RelabelType in 7.0. The commit log
message for 57b30e8e2 is interesting reading here.) As a compromise,
we'll sneak the change into 14beta3, and consider back-patching to
stable branches if no complaints emerge in the next three months.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CABNQVagu3bZGqiTjb31a8D5Od3fUMs7Oh3gmZMQZVHZ=uWWWfQ@mail.gmail.com
Similar to 50e17ad28, which allowed hash tables to be used for IN clauses
with a set of constants, here we add the same feature for NOT IN clauses.
NOT IN evaluates the same as: WHERE a <> v1 AND a <> v2 AND a <> v3.
Obviously, if we're using a hash table we must be exactly equivalent to
that and return the same result taking into account that either side of
the condition could contain a NULL. This requires a little bit of
special handling to make work with the hash table version.
When processing NOT IN, the ScalarArrayOpExpr's operator will be the <>
operator. To be able to build and lookup a hash table we must use the
<>'s negator operator. The planner checks if that exists and is hashable
and sets the relevant fields in ScalarArrayOpExpr to instruct the executor
to use hashing.
Author: David Rowley, James Coleman
Reviewed-by: James Coleman, Zhihong Yu
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvoF1mum_FRk6D621edcB6KSHBi2+GAgWmioj5AhOu2vwQ@mail.gmail.com
ScalarArrayOpExprs with "useOr=true" and a set of Consts on the righthand
side have traditionally been evaluated by using a linear search over the
array. When these arrays contain large numbers of elements then this
linear search could become a significant part of execution time.
Here we add a new method of evaluating ScalarArrayOpExpr expressions to
allow them to be evaluated by first building a hash table containing each
element, then on subsequent evaluations, we just probe that hash table to
determine if there is a match.
The planner is in charge of determining when this optimization is possible
and it enables it by setting hashfuncid in the ScalarArrayOpExpr. The
executor will only perform the hash table evaluation when the hashfuncid
is set.
This means that not all cases are optimized. For example CHECK constraints
containing an IN clause won't go through the planner, so won't get the
hashfuncid set. We could maybe do something about that at some later
date. The reason we're not doing it now is from fear that we may slow
down cases where the expression is evaluated only once. Those cases can
be common, for example, a single row INSERT to a table with a CHECK
constraint containing an IN clause.
In the planner, we enable this when there are suitable hash functions for
the ScalarArrayOpExpr's operator and only when there is at least
MIN_ARRAY_SIZE_FOR_HASHED_SAOP elements in the array. The threshold is
currently set to 9.
Author: James Coleman, David Rowley
Reviewed-by: David Rowley, Tomas Vondra, Heikki Linnakangas
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAaqYe8x62+=wn0zvNKCj55tPpg-JBHzhZFFc6ANovdqFw7-dA@mail.gmail.com
I chanced to notice while thumbing through lcov reports that we had
exactly no coverage of BETWEEN SYMMETRIC, nor of current_time(N) and
localtime(N). Improve that.
parse_expr.c still has a pretty awful coverage number, but a large part
of that is due to lack of coverage of the operator_precedence_warning
logic. I have zero desire to write tests for that; I think ripping it
out would be more sensible at this point.
Upcoming patches are revamping expression evaluation significantly. It
therefore seems prudent to try to ensure that the coverage of the
existing evaluation code is high.
This commit adds coverage for the cases that can reasonably be
tested. There's still a bunch of unreachable error messages and such,
but otherwise this achieves nearly full regression test coverage (with
the exception of the unused GetAttributeByNum/GetAttributeByName).
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170310194021.ek4bs4bl2khxkmll@alap3.anarazel.de
