public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Melanie Plageman <[email protected]>
To: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: Richard Guo <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Wrong results from Parallel Hash Full Join
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2023 14:59:11 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAKRu_Z=rzXjxVtA7gPe2bmBk7F6e4_pe8iT5DmnYFOgWPxMGQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <CAMbWs48Nde1Mv=BJv6_vXmRKHMuHZm2Q_g4F6Z3_pn+3EV6BGQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAKRu_aaaGtjJK5Jt2NKbs-X2v9md-sW8em7kzMHpwZstrLT-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>

On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 2:14 PM Andres Freund <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2023-04-12 10:57:17 -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > HeapTupleHeaderHasMatch() checks if HEAP_TUPLE_HAS_MATCH is set.
> >
> > In htup_details.h, you will see that HEAP_TUPLE_HAS_MATCH is defined as
> > HEAP_ONLY_TUPLE
> > /*
> >  * HEAP_TUPLE_HAS_MATCH is a temporary flag used during hash joins.  It is
> >  * only used in tuples that are in the hash table, and those don't need
> >  * any visibility information, so we can overlay it on a visibility flag
> >  * instead of using up a dedicated bit.
> >  */
> > #define HEAP_TUPLE_HAS_MATCH    HEAP_ONLY_TUPLE /* tuple has a join match */
> >
> > If you redefine HEAP_TUPLE_HAS_MATCH as something that isn't already
> > used, say 0x1800, the query returns correct results.
> > [...]
> > The question is, why does this only happen for a parallel full hash join?
>
> I'd guess that PHJ code is missing a HeapTupleHeaderClearMatch() somewhere,
> but the non-parallel case isn't.

Indeed. Thanks! This diff fixes the case Richard provided.

diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeHash.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeHash.c
index a45bd3a315..54c06c5eb3 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeHash.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeHash.c
@@ -1724,6 +1724,7 @@ retry:
                /* Store the hash value in the HashJoinTuple header. */
                hashTuple->hashvalue = hashvalue;
                memcpy(HJTUPLE_MINTUPLE(hashTuple), tuple, tuple->t_len);
+               HeapTupleHeaderClearMatch(HJTUPLE_MINTUPLE(hashTuple));

                /* Push it onto the front of the bucket's list */
                ExecParallelHashPushTuple(&hashtable->buckets.shared[bucketno],

I will propose a patch that includes this change and a test.

I just want to convince myself that ExecParallelHashTableInsertCurrentBatch()
covers the non-batch 0 cases and we don't need to add something to
sts_puttuple().

- Melanie

view thread (3+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Wrong results from Parallel Hash Full Join
  In-Reply-To: <CAAKRu_Z=rzXjxVtA7gPe2bmBk7F6e4_pe8iT5DmnYFOgWPxMGQ@mail.gmail.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox