Re: Streaming read-ready sequential scan code
От | Melanie Plageman |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Streaming read-ready sequential scan code |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAAKRu_bWbq=UJs9ch5OFKNDbw-q5O=i6gw3_P4M2T9jOP030ZQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Streaming read-ready sequential scan code (Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Streaming read-ready sequential scan code
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 4:56 PM Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 02, 2024 at 06:07:48PM -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 12:30 PM Melanie Plageman > > <melanieplageman@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 03:56:57PM -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 6:05 PM Melanie Plageman > > > > <melanieplageman@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 4:17 PM Melanie Plageman > > > > > <melanieplageman@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > There is an outstanding question about where to allocate the > > > > > > PgStreamingRead object for sequential scans > > > > > > > > > > I've written three alternative implementations of the actual streaming > > > > > read user for sequential scan which handle the question of where to > > > > > allocate the streaming read object and how to handle changing scan > > > > > direction in different ways. > > > > > > > > > > Option A) https://github.com/melanieplageman/postgres/tree/seqscan_pgsr_initscan_allocation > > > > > - Allocates the streaming read object in initscan(). Since we do not > > > > > know the scan direction at this time, if the scan ends up not being a > > > > > forwards scan, the streaming read object must later be freed -- so > > > > > this will sometimes allocate a streaming read object it never uses. > > > > > - Only supports ForwardScanDirection and once the scan direction > > > > > changes, streaming is never supported again -- even if we return to > > > > > ForwardScanDirection > > > > > - Must maintain a "fallback" codepath that does not use the streaming read API > > > > > > > > Attached is a version of this patch which implements a "reset" > > > > function for the streaming read API which should be cheaper than the > > > > full pg_streaming_read_free() on rescan. This can easily be ported to > > > > work on any of my proposed implementations (A/B/C). I implemented it > > > > on A as an example. > > > > > > Attached is the latest version of this patchset -- rebased in light of > > > Thomas' updatees to the streaming read API [1]. I have chosen the > > > approach I think we should go with. It is a hybrid of my previously > > > proposed approaches. > > > > While investigating some performance concerns, Andres pointed out that > > the members I add to HeapScanDescData in this patch push rs_cindex and > > rs_ntuples to another cacheline and introduce a 4-byte hole. Attached > > v4's HeapScanDescData is as well-packed as on master and its members > > are reordered so that rs_cindex and rs_ntuples are back on the second > > cacheline of the struct's data. > > I did some additional profiling and realized that dropping the > unlikely() from the places we check rs_inited frequently was negatively > impacting performance. v5 adds those back and also makes a few other > very minor cleanups. > > Note that this patch set has a not yet released version of Thomas > Munro's Streaming Read API with a new ramp-up logic which seems to fix a > performance issue I saw with my test case when all of the sequential > scan's blocks are in shared buffers. Once he sends the official new > version, I will rebase this and point to his explanation in that thread. Attached v6 has the version of the streaming read API mentioned here [1]. This resolved the fully-in-shared-buffers regressions investigated in that thread by Andres, Bilal, and Thomas. The one outstanding item for the sequential scan streaming read user is deciding how the BAS_BULKREAD buffer access strategy should interact with the streaming read infrastructure. We discussed a bit off-list, and it seems clear that the ring must be at least as large as io_combine_limit. This should be no problem for BAS_BULKREAD because its ring is 16 MB. The question is whether or not we need to do anything right now to ensure there aren't adverse interactions between io_combine_limit, max_ios, and the buffer access strategy ring buffer size. - Melanie [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BhUKGJTwrS7F%3DuJPx3SeigMiQiW%2BLJaOkjGyZdCntwyMR%3DuAw%40mail.gmail.com
Вложения
- v6-0001-Split-heapgetpage-into-two-parts.patch
- v6-0002-Replace-blocks-with-buffers-in-heapgettup-control.patch
- v6-0004-Provide-API-for-streaming-relation-data.patch
- v6-0003-Provide-vectored-variant-of-ReadBuffer.patch
- v6-0005-Add-read_stream_reset.patch
- v6-0006-Sequential-scans-and-TID-range-scans-stream-reads.patch
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: