From: "n.pettik" <korablev@tarantool.org>
To: tarantool-patches@freelists.org
Cc: Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>
Subject: [tarantool-patches] Re: [PATCH] sql: remove redundant goto from VDBE prologue
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 20:45:27 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <27FB91D4-8386-4AE9-8A1E-B68FE60EAB6B@tarantool.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5b137003-b3ea-918d-4528-a1c30712abd5@tarantool.org>
> On 18 Jun 2018, at 14:06, Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org> wrote:
>
>
>>>
>>> 3. As far as I see, P2 in OP_Init is 1 already when we are here. It is
>>> not? See allocVdbe function. P2 == 1 by default, and here it can be changed to
>>> goto to ttrans.
>> In fact, it is changed by sqlite3VdbeJumpHere(v, 0);
>> Thus, we have to again set its value to 1, in case of omitting jump.
>
> It is done in the same function few lines above. How about
> to do not do this jump + not jump? I have slightly refactored the
> code to do not this jump. Please, see the separate commit on
> the branch.
>
> (I did not check the tests).
Thx for refactoring, but it wouldn’t work this way:
We must firstly make lable to jump (sqlite3VdbeJumpHere(v, 0);),
then test on emitting OP_TTransaction and const exprs (or both). If we need to
add such opcodes, then we should jump back. Otherwise, dismiss initial jump.
+++ b/src/box/sql/build.c
@@ -74,11 +74,11 @@ sql_finish_coding(struct Parse *parse_context)
*/
assert(!parse_context->isMultiWrite ||
sqlite3VdbeAssertMayAbort(v, parse_context->mayAbort));
+ sqlite3VdbeJumpHere(v, 0);
+ if (parse_context->initiateTTrans)
+ sqlite3VdbeAddOp0(v, OP_TTransaction);
if (parse_context->pConstExpr != NULL) {
assert(sqlite3VdbeGetOp(v, 0)->opcode == OP_Init);
- sqlite3VdbeJumpHere(v, 0);
- if (parse_context->initiateTTrans)
- sqlite3VdbeAddOp0(v, OP_TTransaction);
/*
* Code constant expressions that where
* factored out of inner loops.
@@ -89,21 +89,22 @@ sql_finish_coding(struct Parse *parse_context)
sqlite3ExprCode(parse_context, exprs->a[i].pExpr,
exprs->a[i].u. iConstExprReg);
}
- /*
- * Finally, jump back to the beginning of
- * the executable code. In fact, it is required
- * only if some additional opcodes are generated.
- * Otherwise, it would be useless jump:
- *
- * 0: OP_Init 0 vdbe_end ...
- * 1: ...
- * ...
- * vdbe_end: OP_Goto 0 1 ...
- */
- sqlite3VdbeGoto(v, 1);
- } else if (parse_context->initiateTTrans) {
- sqlite3VdbeGoto(v, 1);
}
+ /*
+ * Finally, jump back to the beginning of
+ * the executable code. In fact, it is required
+ * only if some additional opcodes are generated.
+ * Otherwise, it would be useless jump:
+ *
+ * 0: OP_Init 0 vdbe_end ...
+ * 1: ...
+ * ...
+ * vdbe_end: OP_Goto 0 1 ...
+ */
+ if (parse_context->initiateTTrans || parse_context->pConstExpr != NULL)
+ sqlite3VdbeGoto(v, 1);
+ else
+ sqlite3VdbeChangeP2(v, 0, 1);
>
>>>
>>>> }
>>>> /* Get the VDBE program ready for execution
>>>
>>> 4. Can we test the new VDBE plan using EXPLAIN? I am wondering why all
>>> plan changes are not tested using EXPLAIN.
>> Well, it it is quite complicated to test EXPLAIN command since any change to query
>> planner or code generator at all would result in rewriting such tests. Hence, once we
>> decided to avoid using tests with EXPLAIN until we get stable code generation.
>
> I think, that we should start test plans. At least, here it is possible to call
> EXPLAIN, test first result line only and ignore others. Then this test will not
> fail on any plan change.
Ok, I added a couple of simple tests:
+++ b/test/sql-tap/explain.test.lua
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env tarantool
+test = require("sqltester")
+test:plan(3)
+
+-- gh-3231: make sure that there is no redundant OP_Goto at the
+-- start of VDBE program. In other words OP_Init jumps exactly to
+-- the next opcode (i.e. opcode with address 1).
+--
+test:do_execsql_test(
+ "explain-1.0",
+ [[
+ CREATE TABLE t1(id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, a INT);
+ INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(1, 2), (3, 4), (5, 6);
+ SELECT * FROM t1;
+ ]], {
+ -- <explain-1.0>
+ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
+ -- </explain-1.0>
+ })
+
+test:do_test(
+ "explain-1.1",
+ function()
+ opcodes = test:execsql("EXPLAIN SELECT * FROM t1;")
+ return opcodes[1]
+ end,
+ -- <explain-1.1>
+ 0, 'Init', 0, 1, 0, '', '00', 'Start at 1'
+ -- </explain-1.1>
+ )
+
+test:do_test(
+ "explain-1.2",
+ function()
+ opcodes = test:execsql("EXPLAIN SELECT a + 1 FROM t1 WHERE id = 4 OR id = 5;")
+ return opcodes[1]
+ end,
+ -- <explain-1.2>
+ 0, 'Init', 0, 1, 0, '', '00', 'Start at 1'
+ -- </explain-1.2>
+ )
+
+test:finish_test()
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-18 17:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-12 18:26 [tarantool-patches] " Nikita Pettik
2018-06-17 20:08 ` [tarantool-patches] " Vladislav Shpilevoy
2018-06-18 10:46 ` n.pettik
2018-06-18 11:06 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy
2018-06-18 17:45 ` n.pettik [this message]
2018-06-18 18:57 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy
2018-06-18 20:55 ` n.pettik
2018-06-18 21:03 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy
2018-06-19 8:21 ` Kirill Yukhin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=27FB91D4-8386-4AE9-8A1E-B68FE60EAB6B@tarantool.org \
--to=korablev@tarantool.org \
--cc=tarantool-patches@freelists.org \
--cc=v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org \
--subject='[tarantool-patches] Re: [PATCH] sql: remove redundant goto from VDBE prologue' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox