Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
Select Git revision
  • benchmark-tools
  • postgres-lambda
  • master default
  • REL9_4_25
  • REL9_5_20
  • REL9_6_16
  • REL_10_11
  • REL_11_6
  • REL_12_1
  • REL_12_0
  • REL_12_RC1
  • REL_12_BETA4
  • REL9_4_24
  • REL9_5_19
  • REL9_6_15
  • REL_10_10
  • REL_11_5
  • REL_12_BETA3
  • REL9_4_23
  • REL9_5_18
  • REL9_6_14
  • REL_10_9
  • REL_11_4
23 results

gist

  • Clone with SSH
  • Clone with HTTPS
  • user avatar
    Heikki Linnakangas authored
    When inserting the downlinks for a split gist page, we used hold the locks
    on the child pages until the insertion into the parent - and recursively its
    parent if it had to be split too - were all completed. Change that so that
    the locks on child pages are released after the insertion in the immediate
    parent is done, before recursing further up the tree.
    
    This reduces the number of lwlocks that are held simultaneously. Holding
    many locks is bad for concurrency, and in extreme cases you can even hit
    the limit of 100 simultaneously held lwlocks in a backend. If you're really
    unlucky, you can hit the limit while in a critical section, which brings
    down the whole system.
    
    This fixes bug #6629 reported by Tom Forbes. Backpatch to 9.1. The page
    splitting code was rewritten in 9.1, and the old code did not have this
    problem.
    3652d72d
    History
    src/backend/access/gist/README
    
    GiST Indexing
    =============
    
    This directory contains an implementation of GiST indexing for Postgres.
    
    GiST stands for Generalized Search Tree. It was introduced in the seminal paper
    "Generalized Search Trees for Database Systems", 1995, Joseph M. Hellerstein,
    Jeffrey F. Naughton, Avi Pfeffer:
    
        http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/postgres/gist/papers/gist.ps
    
    and implemented by J. Hellerstein and P. Aoki in an early version of
    PostgreSQL (more details are available from The GiST Indexing Project
    at Berkeley at http://gist.cs.berkeley.edu/). As a "university"
    project it had a limited number of features and was in rare use.
    
    The current implementation of GiST supports:
    
      * Variable length keys
      * Composite keys (multi-key)
      * Ordered search (nearest-neighbor search)
      * provides NULL-safe interface to GiST core
      * Concurrency
      * Recovery support via WAL logging
      * Buffering build algorithm
    
    The support for concurrency implemented in PostgreSQL was developed based on
    the paper "Access Methods for Next-Generation Database Systems" by
    Marcel Kornaker:
    
        http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/postgres/gist/papers/concurrency/access-methods-for-next-generation.pdf.gz
    
    Buffering build algorithm for GiST was developed based on the paper "Efficient
    Bulk Operations on Dynamic R-trees" by Lars Arge, Klaus Hinrichs, Jan Vahrenhold
    and Jeffrey Scott Vitter.
    
        http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.135.9894&rep=rep1&type=pdf
    
    The original algorithms were modified in several ways:
    
    * They had to be adapted to PostgreSQL conventions. For example, the SEARCH
      algorithm was considerably changed, because in PostgreSQL the search function
      should return one tuple (next), not all tuples at once. Also, it should
      release page locks between calls.
    * Since we added support for variable length keys, it's not possible to
      guarantee enough free space for all keys on pages after splitting. User
      defined function picksplit doesn't have information about size of tuples
      (each tuple may contain several keys as in multicolumn index while picksplit
      could work with only one key) and pages.
    * We modified original INSERT algorithm for performance reasons. In particular,
      it is now a single-pass algorithm.
    * Since the papers were theoretical, some details were omitted and we
      had to find out ourself how to solve some specific problems.
    
    Because of the above reasons, we have revised the interaction of GiST
    core and PostgreSQL WAL system. Moreover, we encountered (and solved)
    a problem of uncompleted insertions when recovering after crash, which
    was not touched in the paper.
    
    Search Algorithm
    ----------------
    
    The search code maintains a queue of unvisited items, where an "item" is
    either a heap tuple known to satisfy the search conditions, or an index
    page that is consistent with the search conditions according to inspection
    of its parent page's downlink item.  Initially the root page is searched
    to find unvisited items in it.  Then we pull items from the queue.  A
    heap tuple pointer is just returned immediately; an index page entry
    causes that page to be searched, generating more queue entries.
    
    The queue is kept ordered with heap tuple items at the front, then
    index page entries, with any newly-added index page entry inserted
    before existing index page entries.  This ensures depth-first traversal
    of the index, and in particular causes the first few heap tuples to be
    returned as soon as possible.  That is helpful in case there is a LIMIT
    that requires only a few tuples to be produced.
    
    To implement nearest-neighbor search, the queue entries are augmented
    with distance data: heap tuple entries are labeled with exact distance
    from the search argument, while index-page entries must be labeled with
    the minimum distance that any of their children could have.  Then,
    queue entries are retrieved in smallest-distance-first order, with
    entries having identical distances managed as stated in the previous
    paragraph.
    
    The search algorithm keeps an index page locked only long enough to scan
    its entries and queue those that satisfy the search conditions.  Since
    insertions can occur concurrently with searches, it is possible for an
    index child page to be split between the time we make a queue entry for it
    (while visiting its parent page) and the time we actually reach and scan
    the child page.  To avoid missing the entries that were moved to the right
    sibling, we detect whether a split has occurred by comparing the child
    page's NSN to the LSN that the parent had when visited.  If it did, the
    sibling page is immediately added to the front of the queue, ensuring that
    its items will be scanned in the same order as if they were still on the
    original child page.
    
    As is usual in Postgres, the search algorithm only guarantees to find index
    entries that existed before the scan started; index entries added during
    the scan might or might not be visited.  This is okay as long as all
    searches use MVCC snapshot rules to reject heap tuples newer than the time
    of scan start.  In particular, this means that we need not worry about
    cases where a parent page's downlink key is "enlarged" after we look at it.
    Any such enlargement would be to add child items that we aren't interested
    in returning anyway.
    
    
    Insert Algorithm
    ----------------
    
    INSERT guarantees that the GiST tree remains balanced. User defined key method
    Penalty is used for choosing a subtree to insert; method PickSplit is used for
    the node splitting algorithm; method Union is used for propagating changes
    upward to maintain the tree properties.
    
    To insert a tuple, we first have to find a suitable leaf page to insert to.
    The algorithm walks down the tree, starting from the root, along the path
    of smallest Penalty. At each step:
    
    1. Has this page been split since we looked at the parent? If so, it's
    possible that we should be inserting to the other half instead, so retreat
    back to the parent.
    2. If this is a leaf node, we've found our target node.
    3. Otherwise use Penalty to pick a new target subtree.
    4. Check the key representing the target subtree. If it doesn't already cover
    the key we're inserting, replace it with the Union of the old downlink key
    and the key being inserted. (Actually, we always call Union, and just skip
    the replacement if the Unioned key is the same as the existing key)
    5. Replacing the key in step 4 might cause the page to be split. In that case,
    propagate the change upwards and restart the algorithm from the first parent
    that didn't need to be split.
    6. Walk down to the target subtree, and goto 1.
    
    This differs from the insertion algorithm in the original paper. In the
    original paper, you first walk down the tree until you reach a leaf page, and
    then you adjust the downlink in the parent, and propagating the adjustment up,
    all the way up to the root in the worst case. But we adjust the downlinks to
    cover the new key already when we walk down, so that when we reach the leaf
    page, we don't need to update the parents anymore, except to insert the
    downlinks if we have to split the page. This makes crash recovery simpler:
    after inserting a key to the page, the tree is immediately self-consistent
    without having to update the parents. Even if we split a page and crash before
    inserting the downlink to the parent, the tree is self-consistent because the
    right half of the split is accessible via the rightlink of the left page
    (which replaced the original page).
    
    Note that the algorithm can walk up and down the tree before reaching a leaf
    page, if internal pages need to split while adjusting the downlinks for the
    new key. Eventually, you should reach the bottom, and proceed with the
    insertion of the new tuple.
    
    Once we've found the target page to insert to, we check if there's room
    for the new tuple. If there is, the tuple is inserted, and we're done.
    If it doesn't fit, however, the page needs to be split. Note that it is
    possible that a page needs to be split into more than two pages, if keys have
    different lengths or more than one key is being inserted at a time (which can
    happen when inserting downlinks for a page split that resulted in more than
    two pages at the lower level). After splitting a page, the parent page needs
    to be updated. The downlink for the new page needs to be inserted, and the
    downlink for the old page, which became the left half of the split, needs to
    be updated to only cover those tuples that stayed on the left page. Inserting
    the downlink in the parent can again lead to a page split, recursing up to the
    root page in the worst case.
    
    gistplacetopage is the workhorse function that performs one step of the
    insertion. If the tuple fits, it inserts it to the given page, otherwise
    it splits the page, and constructs the new downlink tuples for the split
    pages. The caller must then call gistplacetopage() on the parent page to
    insert the downlink tuples. The parent page that holds the downlink to
    the child might have migrated as a result of concurrent splits of the
    parent, gistfindCorrectParent() is used to find the parent page.
    
    Splitting the root page works slightly differently. At root split,
    gistplacetopage() allocates the new child pages and replaces the old root
    page with the new root containing downlinks to the new children, all in one
    operation.
    
    
    findPath is a subroutine of findParent, used when the correct parent page
    can't be found by following the rightlinks at the parent level:
    
    findPath( stack item )
    	push stack, [root, 0, 0] // page, LSN, parent
    	while( stack )
    		ptr = top of stack
    		latch( ptr->page, S-mode )
    		if ( ptr->parent->page->lsn < ptr->page->nsn )
    			push stack, [ ptr->page->rightlink, 0, ptr->parent ]
    		end
    		for( each tuple on page )
    			if ( tuple->pagepointer == item->page )
    				return stack
    			else
    				add to stack at the end [tuple->pagepointer,0, ptr]
    			end
    		end
    		unlatch( ptr->page )
    		pop stack
    	end
    
    
    gistFindCorrectParent is used to re-find the parent of a page during
    insertion. It might have migrated to the right since we traversed down the
    tree because of page splits.
    
    findParent( stack item )
    	parent = item->parent
    	if ( parent->page->lsn != parent->lsn )
    		while(true)
    			search parent tuple on parent->page, if found the return
    			rightlink = parent->page->rightlink
    			unlatch( parent->page )
    			if ( rightlink is incorrect )
    				break loop
    			end
    			parent->page = rightlink
    			latch( parent->page, X-mode )
    		end
    		newstack = findPath( item->parent )
    		replace part of stack to new one
    		latch( parent->page, X-mode )
    		return findParent( item )
    	end
    
    pageSplit function decides how to distribute keys to the new pages after
    page split:
    
    pageSplit(page, allkeys)
    	(lkeys, rkeys) = pickSplit( allkeys )
    	if ( page is root )
    		lpage = new page
    	else
    		lpage = page
    	rpage = new page
    	if ( no space left on rpage )
    		newkeys = pageSplit( rpage, rkeys )
    	else
    		push newkeys, union(rkeys)
    	end
    	if ( no space left on lpage )
    		push newkeys, pageSplit( lpage, lkeys )
    	else
    		push newkeys, union(lkeys)
    	end
    	return newkeys
    
    
    
    Concurrency control
    -------------------
    As a rule of thumb, if you need to hold a lock on multiple pages at the
    same time, the locks should be acquired in the following order: child page
    before parent, and left-to-right at the same level. Always acquiring the
    locks in the same order avoids deadlocks.
    
    The search algorithm only looks at and locks one page at a time. Consequently
    there's a race condition between a search and a page split. A page split
    happens in two phases: 1. The page is split 2. The downlink is inserted to the
    parent. If a search looks at the parent page between those steps, before the
    downlink is inserted, it will still find the new right half by following the
    rightlink on the left half. But it must not follow the rightlink if it saw the
    downlink in the parent, or the page will be visited twice!
    
    A split initially marks the left page with the F_FOLLOW_RIGHT flag. If a scan
    sees that flag set, it knows that the right page is missing the downlink, and
    should be visited too. When split inserts the downlink to the parent, it
    clears the F_FOLLOW_RIGHT flag in the child, and sets the NSN field in the
    child page header to match the LSN of the insertion on the parent. If the
    F_FOLLOW_RIGHT flag is not set, a scan compares the NSN on the child and the
    LSN it saw in the parent. If NSN < LSN, the scan looked at the parent page
    before the downlink was inserted, so it should follow the rightlink. Otherwise
    the scan saw the downlink in the parent page, and will/did follow that as
    usual.
    
    A scan can't normally see a page with the F_FOLLOW_RIGHT flag set, because
    a page split keeps the child pages locked until the downlink has been inserted
    to the parent and the flag cleared again. But if a crash happens in the middle
    of a page split, before the downlinks are inserted into the parent, that will
    leave a page with F_FOLLOW_RIGHT in the tree. Scans handle that just fine,
    but we'll eventually want to fix that for performance reasons. And more
    importantly, dealing with pages with missing downlink pointers in the parent
    would complicate the insertion algorithm. So when an insertion sees a page
    with F_FOLLOW_RIGHT set, it immediately tries to bring the split that
    crashed in the middle to completion by adding the downlink in the parent.
    
    Buffering build algorithm
    -------------------------
    
    In the buffering index build algorithm, some or all internal nodes have a
    buffer attached to them. When a tuple is inserted at the top, the descend down
    the tree is stopped as soon as a buffer is reached, and the tuple is pushed to
    the buffer. When a buffer gets too full, all the tuples in it are flushed to
    the lower level, where they again hit lower level buffers or leaf pages. This
    makes the insertions happen in more of a breadth-first than depth-first order,
    which greatly reduces the amount of random I/O required.
    
    In the algorithm, levels are numbered so that leaf pages have level zero,
    and internal node levels count up from 1. This numbering ensures that a page's
    level number never changes, even when the root page is split.
    
    Level                    Tree
    
    3                         *
                          /       \
    2                *                 *
                  /  |  \           /  |  \
    1          *     *     *     *     *     *
              / \   / \   / \   / \   / \   / \
    0        o   o o   o o   o o   o o   o o   o
    
    * - internal page
    o - leaf page
    
    Internal pages that belong to certain levels have buffers associated with
    them. Leaf pages never have buffers. Which levels have buffers is controlled
    by "level step" parameter: level numbers that are multiples of level_step
    have buffers, while others do not. For example, if level_step = 2, then
    pages on levels 2, 4, 6, ... have buffers. If level_step = 1 then every
    internal page has a buffer.
    
    Level        Tree (level_step = 1)                Tree (level_step = 2)
    
    3                      *                                     *
                       /       \                             /       \
    2             *(b)              *(b)                *(b)              *(b)
               /  |  \           /  |  \             /  |  \           /  |  \
    1       *(b)  *(b)  *(b)  *(b)  *(b)  *(b)    *     *     *     *     *     *
           / \   / \   / \   / \   / \   / \     / \   / \   / \   / \   / \   / \
    0     o   o o   o o   o o   o o   o o   o   o   o o   o o   o o   o o   o o   o
    
    (b) - buffer
    
    Logically, a buffer is just bunch of tuples. Physically, it is divided in
    pages, backed by a temporary file. Each buffer can be in one of two states:
    a) Last page of the buffer is kept in main memory. A node buffer is
    automatically switched to this state when a new index tuple is added to it,
    or a tuple is removed from it.
    b) All pages of the buffer are swapped out to disk. When a buffer becomes too
    full, and we start to flush it, all other buffers are switched to this state.
    
    When an index tuple is inserted, its initial processing can end in one of the
    following points:
    1) Leaf page, if the depth of the index <= level_step, meaning that
       none of the internal pages have buffers associated with them.
    2) Buffer of topmost level page that has buffers.
    
    New index tuples are processed until one of the buffers in the topmost
    buffered level becomes half-full. When a buffer becomes half-full, it's added
    to the emptying queue, and will be emptied before a new tuple is processed.
    
    Buffer emptying process means that index tuples from the buffer are moved
    into buffers at a lower level, or leaf pages. First, all the other buffers are
    swapped to disk to free up the memory. Then tuples are popped from the buffer
    one by one, and cascaded down the tree to the next buffer or leaf page below
    the buffered node.
    
    Emptying a buffer has the interesting dynamic property that any intermediate
    pages between the buffer being emptied, and the next buffered or leaf level
    below it, become cached. If there are no more buffers below the node, the leaf
    pages where the tuples finally land on get cached too. If there are, the last
    buffer page of each buffer below is kept in memory. This is illustrated in
    the figures below:
    
       Buffer being emptied to
         lower-level buffers               Buffer being emptied to leaf pages
    
                   +(fb)                                 +(fb)
                /     \                                /     \
            +             +                        +             +
          /   \         /   \                    /   \         /   \
        *(ab)   *(ab) *(ab)   *(ab)            x       x     x       x
    
    +    - cached internal page
    x    - cached leaf page
    *    - non-cached internal page
    (fb) - buffer being emptied
    (ab) - buffers being appended to, with last page in memory
    
    In the beginning of the index build, the level-step is chosen so that all those
    pages involved in emptying one buffer fit in cache, so after each of those
    pages have been accessed once and cached, emptying a buffer doesn't involve
    any more I/O. This locality is where the speedup of the buffering algorithm
    comes from.
    
    Emptying one buffer can fill up one or more of the lower-level buffers,
    triggering emptying of them as well. Whenever a buffer becomes too full, it's
    added to the emptying queue, and will be emptied after the current buffer has
    been processed.
    
    To keep the size of each buffer limited even in the worst case, buffer emptying
    is scheduled as soon as a buffer becomes half-full, and emptying it continues
    until 1/2 of the nominal buffer size worth of tuples has been emptied. This
    guarantees that when buffer emptying begins, all the lower-level buffers
    are at most half-full. In the worst case that all the tuples are cascaded down
    to the same lower-level buffer, that buffer therefore has enough space to
    accommodate all the tuples emptied from the upper-level buffer. There is no
    hard size limit in any of the data structures used, though, so this only needs
    to be approximate; small overfilling of some buffers doesn't matter.
    
    If an internal page that has a buffer associated with it is split, the buffer
    needs to be split too. All tuples in the buffer are scanned through and
    relocated to the correct sibling buffers, using the penalty function to decide
    which buffer each tuple should go to.
    
    After all tuples from the heap have been processed, there are still some index
    tuples in the buffers. At this point, final buffer emptying starts. All buffers
    are emptied in top-down order. This is slightly complicated by the fact that
    new buffers can be allocated during the emptying, due to page splits. However,
    the new buffers will always be siblings of buffers that haven't been fully
    emptied yet; tuples never move upwards in the tree. The final emptying loops
    through buffers at a given level until all buffers at that level have been
    emptied, and then moves down to the next level.
    
    
    Authors:
    	Teodor Sigaev	<teodor@sigaev.ru>
    	Oleg Bartunov	<oleg@sai.msu.su>