Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size

On 2022-07-05 Tu 15:04, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 2022-07-05 Tu 14:36, Andres Freund wrote:
>>
>>>> I think Andrew's beta 2 comment was more about my other architectural
>>>> complains around the json expression eval stuff.
>>> Right. That's being worked on but it's not going to be a mechanical fix.
>> Any updates here?
>
> Not yet. A colleague and I are working on it. I'll post a status this
> week if we can't post a fix.


We're still working on it. We've made substantial progress but there are
some tests failing that we need to fix.


>> I'd mentioned the significant space use due to all JsonCoercionsState for all
>> the types. Another related aspect is that this code is just weird - the same
>> struct name (JsonCoercionsState), nested in each other?
>>
>>     struct JsonCoercionsState
>>     {
>>         struct JsonCoercionState
>>         {
>>             JsonCoercion *coercion; /* coercion expression */
>>             ExprState  *estate; /* coercion expression state */
>>         }           null,
>>                     string,
>>         numeric    ,
>>                     boolean,
>>                     date,
>>                     time,
>>                     timetz,
>>                     timestamp,
>>                     timestamptz,
>>                     composite;
>>     }           coercions;      /* states for coercion from SQL/JSON item
>>                                  * types directly to the output type */
>>
>> Also note the weird numeric indentation that pgindent does...
>
> Yeah, we'll try to fix that.


Actually, it's not the same name: JsonCoercionsState vs
JsonCoercionState. But I agree that it's a subtle enough difference that
we should use something more obvious. Maybe JsonCoercionStates instead
of JsonCoercionsState? The plural at the end would be harder to miss.


cheers


andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com