On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 4:45 PM Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:25 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> > Evaluating N expressions for a json table isn't a good approach, both memory
> > and CPU efficiency wise.
>
> Are you referring to JsonTableInitOpaque() initializing all these
> sub-expressions of JsonTableParent, especially colvalexprs, using N
> *independent* ExprStates? That could perhaps be made to work by
> making JsonTableParent be an expression recognized by execExpr.c, so
> that a single ExprState can store the steps for all its
> sub-expressions, much like JsonExpr is. I'll give that a try, though
> I wonder if the semantics of making this work in a single
> ExecEvalExpr() call will mismatch that of the current way, because
> different sub-expressions are currently evaluated under different APIs
> of TableFuncRoutine.
I was looking at this and realized that using N ExprStates for various
subsidiary expressions is not something specific to JSON_TABLE
implementation. I mean we already have bunch of ExprStates being
created in ExecInitTableFuncScan():
scanstate->ns_uris =
ExecInitExprList(tf->ns_uris, (PlanState *) scanstate);
scanstate->docexpr =
ExecInitExpr((Expr *) tf->docexpr, (PlanState *) scanstate);
scanstate->rowexpr =
ExecInitExpr((Expr *) tf->rowexpr, (PlanState *) scanstate);
scanstate->colexprs =
ExecInitExprList(tf->colexprs, (PlanState *) scanstate);
scanstate->coldefexprs =
ExecInitExprList(tf->coldefexprs, (PlanState *) scanstate);
Or maybe you're worried about jsonpath_exec.c using so many ExprStates
*privately* to put into TableFuncScanState.opaque?
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com