Re: Adding skip scan (including MDAM style range skip scan) to nbtree
Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Commits
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
nbtree: Always set skipScan flag on rescan.
- 454c046094ab 19 (unreleased) landed
- bee763aea13f 18.0 landed
-
meson: Build numeric.c with -ftree-vectorize.
- 9016fa7e3bcd 19 (unreleased) cited
-
Fix "variable not found in subplan target lists" in semijoin de-duplication.
- b8a1bdc458e3 19 (unreleased) cited
-
Revert "nbtree: Remove useless row compare arg."
- dd2ce3792754 18.0 landed
-
nbtree: Remove useless row compare arg.
- 54c6ea8c81db 18.0 cited
-
Prevent premature nbtree array advancement.
- 5f4d98d4f371 18.0 landed
-
nbtree: tighten up array recheck rules.
- 7e25c9363a82 18.0 landed
-
Avoid treating nonrequired nbtree keys as required.
- 0f08df406822 18.0 landed
-
Adjust overstrong nbtree skip array assertion.
- 9d924dbb3710 18.0 landed
-
Make NULL tuple values always advance skip arrays.
- b75fedcab791 18.0 cited
-
Avoid extra index searches through preprocessing.
- b3f1a13f22f9 18.0 landed
-
Improve nbtree skip scan primitive scan scheduling.
- 21a152b37f36 18.0 landed
-
Further optimize nbtree search scan key comparisons.
- 8a510275dd6b 18.0 landed
-
Add nbtree skip scan optimization.
- 92fe23d93aa3 18.0 landed
-
Improve nbtree array primitive scan scheduling.
- 9a2e2a285a14 18.0 landed
-
nbtree: Make BTMaxItemSize into object-like macro.
- 426ea611171d 18.0 landed
-
Show index search count in EXPLAIN ANALYZE, take 2.
- 0fbceae841cb 18.0 landed
-
Make parallel nbtree index scans use an LWLock.
- 67fc4c9fd7fa 18.0 landed
-
Show index search count in EXPLAIN ANALYZE.
- 5ead85fbc811 18.0 landed
-
Avoid nbtree parallel scan currPos confusion.
- b5ee4e52026b 18.0 cited
-
nbtree: Remove useless 'strat' local variable.
- b6558e4f837e 18.0 landed
-
Normalize nbtree truncated high key array behavior.
- 79fa7b3b1a44 18.0 landed
-
Refactor handling of nbtree array redundancies.
- b524974106ac 18.0 landed
-
Fix nbtree pgstats accounting with parallel scans.
- c00c54a9ac1e 18.0 landed
- fb4f5e58af97 17.0 landed
-
Avoid parallel nbtree index scan hangs with SAOPs.
- d8adfc18bebf 18.0 landed
- a24bffc021d9 17.0 landed
-
Show Parallel Bitmap Heap Scan worker stats in EXPLAIN ANALYZE
- 5a1e6df3b84c 18.0 cited
-
Enhance nbtree ScalarArrayOp execution.
- 5bf748b86bc6 17.0 cited
-
Skip checking of scan keys required for directional scan in B-tree
- e0b1ee17dc3a 17.0 cited
-
Instead of using a numberOfRequiredKeys count to distinguish required
- 7ccaf13a06b8 8.2.0 cited
Attachments
- v1-0001-Avoid-treating-nonrequired-nbtree-keys-as-require.patch (application/octet-stream) patch v1-0001
- v1-0002-Prevent-prematurely-nbtree-array-advancement.patch (application/octet-stream) patch v1-0002
On Fri, May 2, 2025 at 2:22 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote: > A slight variant of my fuzzing Python script did in fact go on to > detect a couple of bugs. > > I'm attaching a compressed SQL file with repros for 2 different bugs. > The first bug was independently detected by some kind of fuzzing > performed by Mark Dilger, reported elsewhere [1]. Picking up from the email with the big attachment... Both bugs are from commit 8a510275, "Further optimize nbtree search scan key comparisons" (not the main skip scan commit). I actually wrote code very much like the code from these patches that appeared in certain versions of the skip scan patch series -- it was originally supposed to be defensive hardening. This so-called hardening wasn't kept in the final committed version because I incorrectly believed that it wasn't necessary. I would like to commit the first patch later today, ahead of shipping beta1. But the second patch won't make it into beta1. In practice the bug fixed by the first patch is more likely to affect users, and (unlike the bug fixed by the second patch), it involves a hard crash. The first patch prevents us from dereferencing a NULL pointer (pstate) within _bt_advance_array_keys (unless on an assert-enabled build, where we get an assertion failure first). It would also be possible to fix the issue by testing if pstate itself is not a NULL pointer in the usual defensive style, but I find the approach taken in the first patch slightly more natural. The second patch is more complicated, and seems like something that I'll need to spend more time thinking about before proceeding with commit. It has subtle behavioral implications, in that it causes the pstate.forcenonrequired mechanism to influence when and how _bt_advance_array_keys schedules primitive index scans in a tiny minority of forward scan cases. I know of only 3 queries where this happens, 2 of which are from my repro -- it's actually really hard to find an example of this, even if you go out of your way to. Allowing pstate.forcenonrequired to affect primscan scheduling like this is something that I have been avoiding up until now, since that makes things cleaner -- but I'm starting to think that that goal isn't important enough to force the second patch to be significantly more complicated than what I came up with here. It's not like the behavioral differences represent a clear regression; they're just slightly different to what we see in cases where pstate.forcenonrequired/pstate.ikey is forcibly not applied (e.g., by commenting-out the calls to _bt_set_startikey made by _bt_readpage). My approach in the second patch is to simply call _bt_start_array_keys ahead of the finaltup call to _bt_checkkeys when pstate.forcenonrequired, which has the merit of being relatively simple (it's likely the simplest possible approach). I'm unwilling to pay too much of a cost in implementation complexity just to avoid side-effects in _bt_advance_array_keys/primscan scheduling, but maybe I'll find that the cost isn't too high. -- Peter Geoghegan