Re: Yet another fast GiST build

Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>

From: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Cc: "Andrey M. Borodin" <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>, Darafei Komяpa Praliaskouski <me@komzpa.net>, Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2020-09-21T08:08:01Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 21/09/2020 02:06, Tom Lane wrote:
> Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> writes:
>> This also appears to break checksums.

Thanks, I'll go fix it.

> I was wondering about that, because the typical pattern for use of
> smgrextend for indexes seems to be
> 
> 	RelationOpenSmgr(rel);
> 	PageSetChecksumInplace(page, lastblock);
> 	smgrextend(rel->rd_smgr, MAIN_FORKNUM, lastblock, zerobuf.data, false);
> 
> and gist_indexsortbuild wasn't doing either of the first two things.
> 
> gist_indexsortbuild_flush_ready_pages looks like it might be
> a few bricks shy of a load too.  But my local CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS
> run hasn't gotten to anything except the pretty-trivial index
> made in point.sql, so I don't have evidence about it.

I don't think a relcache invalidation can happen on the index we're 
building. Other similar callers call RelationOpenSmgr(rel) before every 
write though (e.g. _bt_blwritepage()), so perhaps it's better to copy 
that pattern here too.

> Another interesting point is that all the other index AMs seem to WAL-log
> the new page before the smgrextend call, whereas this code is doing it
> in the other order.  I strongly doubt that both patterns are equally
> correct.  Could be that the other AMs are in the wrong though.

My thinking was that it's better to call smgrextend() first, so that if 
you run out of disk space, you get the error before WAL-logging it. That 
reduces the chance that WAL replay will run out of disk space. A lot of 
things are different during WAL replay, so it's quite likely that WAL 
replay runs out of disk space anyway if you're living on the edge, but 
still.

I didn't notice that the other callers are doing it the other way round, 
though. I think they need to, so that they can stamp the page with the 
LSN of the WAL record. But GiST build is special in that regard, because 
it stamps all pages with GistBuildLSN.

- Heikki



Commits

  1. Add sortsupport for gist_btree opclasses, for faster index builds.

  2. pageinspect: Fix relcache leak in gist_page_items().

  3. Fix test failure with wal_level=minimal.

  4. Enhance nbtree index tuple deletion.

  5. Fix portability issues in the new gist pageinspect test.

  6. Add functions to 'pageinspect' to inspect GiST indexes.

  7. Fix missing validation for the new GiST sortsupport functions.

  8. Fix compilation warning in xlog.c

  9. Set right-links during sorted GiST index build.

  10. Fix checksum calculation in the new sorting GiST build.

  11. Add support for building GiST index by sorting.