Re: Asynchronous Append on postgres_fdw nodes. - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Konstantin Knizhnik
Subject Re: Asynchronous Append on postgres_fdw nodes.
Date
Msg-id af8e10c8-f893-1a5a-483e-9ae4f4a7b718@postgrespro.ru
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Asynchronous Append on postgres_fdw nodes.  (Konstantin Knizhnik <k.knizhnik@postgrespro.ru>)
Responses Re: Asynchronous Append on postgres_fdw nodes.
List pgsql-hackers

On 22.09.2020 15:52, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
>
>
> On 20.08.2020 10:36, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
>> At Wed, 19 Aug 2020 23:25:36 -0500, Justin Pryzby 
>> <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote in
>>> On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 11:14:48AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
>>>> As the result of a discussion with Fujita-san off-list, I'm going to
>>>> hold off development until he decides whether mine or Thomas' is
>>>> better.
>>> The latest patch doesn't apply so I set as WoA.
>>> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/29/2491/
>> Thanks. This is rebased version.
>>
>> At Fri, 14 Aug 2020 13:29:16 +1200, Thomas Munro 
>> <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote in
>>> Either way, we definitely need patch 0001.  One comment:
>>>
>>> -CreateWaitEventSet(MemoryContext context, int nevents)
>>> +CreateWaitEventSet(MemoryContext context, ResourceOwner res, int 
>>> nevents)
>>>
>>> I wonder if it's better to have it receive ResourceOwner like that, or
>>> to have it capture CurrentResourceOwner.  I think the latter is more
>>> common in existing code.
>> There's no existing WaitEventSets belonging to a resowner. So
>> unconditionally capturing CurrentResourceOwner doesn't work well. I
>> could pass a bool instead but that make things more complex.
>>
>> Come to think of "complex", ExecAsync stuff in this patch might be
>> too-much for a short-term solution until executor overhaul, if it
>> comes shortly. (the patch of mine here as a whole is like that,
>> though..). The queueing stuff in postgres_fdw is, too.
>>
>> regards.
>>
>
>
> Hi,
> Looks like current implementation of asynchronous append incorrectly 
> handle LIMIT clause:
>
> psql:append.sql:10: ERROR:  another command is already in progress
> CONTEXT:  remote SQL command: CLOSE c1
>
>
>
Just FYI: the following patch fixes the problem:

--- a/contrib/postgres_fdw/postgres_fdw.c
+++ b/contrib/postgres_fdw/postgres_fdw.c
@@ -1667,6 +1667,11 @@ remove_async_node(ForeignScanState *node)

          if (cur == node)
          {
+            PGconn *conn = curstate->s.conn;
+
+            while(PQisBusy(conn))
+                PQclear(PQgetResult(conn));
+
              prev_state->waiter = curstate->waiter;

              /* relink to the previous node if the last node was removed */

-- 
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company


Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pgindent vs dtrace on macos