Hi,
On 2020-04-11 15:33:09 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> For the most part it seems like this is asking the question at the wrong
> level. It's not execExpr's job to determine the form of either values
> coming in from "outside" (Vars from table rows, or Params from elsewhere)
> or the results of intermediate functions/operators.
We don't really have good place to do optimizations to transform an
expression to be better for an "upper" expression node.
> In the specific case of an array-valued (or record-valued) Const node,
> you could imagine having a provision to convert the array/record to an
> expanded datum at execution start, or maybe better on first use. I'm
> not sure how to tell whether that's actually a win though. It could
> easily be a net loss if the immediate consumer of the value wants a
> flat datum.
With execution start you do mean ExecInitExpr()? Or later? I see little
reason not to do such an optimization during expression
initialization. It's not going to add much if any overhead compared to
all the rest of the costs to change a Const array into a different
form.
> It seems like this might be somewhat related to the currently-moribund
> patch to allow caching of the values of stable subexpressions from
> one execution to the next. If we had that infrastructure you could
> imagine extending it to allow caching the expanded not flat form of
> some datums. Again I'm not entirely sure what would drive the choice.
> > I wonder if it would be a good idea to change ExecEvalParamExec and
> > ExecEvalParamExtern to detoast the to-be-returned value. If we change
> > the value that's stored in econtext->ecxt_param_exec_vals /
> > econtext->ecxt_param_list_info, we'd avoid repeated detaosting.
>
> I'd think about attaching that to the nestloop param mechanism not
> ExecEvalParam in general.
That was my first though too - but especially if there's multiple
variables detoasting all of them might be a waste if the params are not
dereferenced. So doing it the first time a parameter is used seemed like
it'd be much more likely to be beneficial.
But even there it could be a waste, because e.g. a length comparison
alone is enough to determine inequality. Which is why I was wondering
about somehow being able to detoast the parameter "in place" in the
params arrays.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
