contrib/cache_scan (Re: What's needed for cache-only table scan?) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Kohei KaiGai |
---|---|
Subject | contrib/cache_scan (Re: What's needed for cache-only table scan?) |
Date | |
Msg-id | CADyhKSWORjVYOWxP7x6XMtSt4yUQErSDLf5EjVNM4a+U=1EfMA@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
Responses |
Re: contrib/cache_scan (Re: What's needed for cache-only
table scan?)
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
Hello, The attached patch is what we discussed just before the commit-fest:Nov. It implements an alternative way to scan a particular table using on-memory cache instead of the usual heap access method. Unlike buffer cache, this mechanism caches a limited number of columns on the memory, so memory consumption per tuple is much smaller than the regular heap access method, thus it allows much larger number of tuples on the memory. I'd like to extend this idea to implement a feature to cache data according to column-oriented data structure to utilize parallel calculation processors like CPU's SIMD operations or simple GPU cores. (Probably, it makes sense to evaluate multiple records with a single vector instruction if contents of a particular column is put as a large array.) However, this patch still keeps all the tuples in row-oriented data format, because row <=> column translation makes this patch bigger than the current form (about 2KL), and GPU integration needs to link proprietary library (cuda or opencl) thus I thought it is not preferable for the upstream code. Also note that this patch needs part-1 ~ part-3 patches of CustomScan APIs as prerequisites because it is implemented on top of the APIs. One thing I have to apologize is, lack of documentation and source code comments around the contrib/ code. Please give me a couple of days to clean-up the code. Aside from the extension code, I put two enhancement on the core code as follows. I'd like to have a discussion about adequacy of these enhancement. The first enhancement is a hook on heap_page_prune() to synchronize internal state of extension with changes of heap image on the disk. It is not avoidable to hold garbage, increasing time by time, on the cache, thus needs to clean up as vacuum process doing. The best timing to do is when dead tuples are reclaimed because it is certain nobody will reference the tuples any more. diff --git a/src/backend/utils/time/tqual.c b/src/backend/utils/time/tqual.c index f626755..023f78e 100644 --- a/src/backend/utils/time/tqual.c bool marked[MaxHeapTuplesPerPage + 1]; } PruneState; +/* Callback for each page pruning */ +heap_page_prune_hook_type heap_page_prune_hook = NULL; + /* Local functions */ static int heap_prune_chain(Relation relation, Buffer buffer, OffsetNumber rootoffnum, @@ -294,6 +297,16 @@ heap_page_prune(Relation relation, Buffer buffer, Transacti onId OldestXmin, * and update FSM with the remaining space. */ + /* + * This callback allows extensions to synchronize their own status with + * heap image on the disk, when this buffer page is vacuumed. + */ + if (heap_page_prune_hook) + (*heap_page_prune_hook)(relation, + buffer, + ndeleted, + OldestXmin, + prstate.latestRemovedXid); return ndeleted; } The second enhancement makes SetHintBits() accepts InvalidBuffer to ignore all the jobs. We need to check visibility of cached tuples when custom-scan node scans cached table instead of the heap. Even though we can use MVCC snapshot to check tuple's visibility, it may internally set hint bit of tuples thus we always needs to give a valid buffer pointer to HeapTupleSatisfiesVisibility(). Unfortunately, it kills all the benefit of table cache if it takes to load the heap buffer being associated with the cached tuple. So, I'd like to have a special case handling on the SetHintBits() for dry-run when InvalidBuffer is given. diff --git a/src/backend/utils/time/tqual.c b/src/backend/utils/time/tqual.c index f626755..023f78e 100644 --- a/src/backend/utils/time/tqual.c +++ b/src/backend/utils/time/tqual.c @@ -103,11 +103,18 @@ static bool XidInMVCCSnapshot(TransactionId xid, Snapshot snapshot); * * The caller should pass xid as the XID of the transaction to check, or * InvalidTransactionId if no check is needed. + * + * In case when the supplied HeapTuple is not associated with a particular + * buffer, it just returns without any jobs. It may happen when an extension + * caches tuple with their own way. */ static inline void SetHintBits(HeapTupleHeader tuple, Buffer buffer, uint16 infomask, TransactionId xid) { + if (BufferIsInvalid(buffer)) + return; + if (TransactionIdIsValid(xid)) { /* NB: xid must be known committed here! */ Thanks, 2013/11/13 Kohei KaiGai <kaigai@kaigai.gr.jp>: > 2013/11/12 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: >> Kohei KaiGai <kaigai@kaigai.gr.jp> writes: >>> So, are you thinking it is a feasible approach to focus on custom-scan >>> APIs during the upcoming CF3, then table-caching feature as use-case >>> of this APIs on CF4? >> >> Sure. If you work on this extension after CF3, and it reveals that the >> custom scan stuff needs some adjustments, there would be time to do that >> in CF4. The policy about what can be submitted in CF4 is that we don't >> want new major features that no one has seen before, not that you can't >> make fixes to previously submitted stuff. Something like a new hook >> in vacuum wouldn't be a "major feature", anyway. >> > Thanks for this clarification. > 3 days are too short to write a patch, however, 2 month may be sufficient > to develop a feature on top of the scheme being discussed in the previous > comitfest. > > Best regards, > -- > KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@kaigai.gr.jp> -- KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@kaigai.gr.jp>
Attachment
pgsql-hackers by date: