Failure to reordering in case of a lateral join in combination with a left join (not inner join) resulting in suboptimal nested loop plan

Peter Billen <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.db.postgresql.performance
Message-ID <CAMTXbE8yTu9Yo=KFcYt2VqAQF_VBEZj4EXuM3JVut0rdFq5SxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,

The queries in what follows can be executed on the following fiddle:
*https://dbfiddle.uk/?rdbms=postgres_10&fiddle=64542f2d987d3ce0d85bbc40ddadf7d6
<https://dbfiddle.uk/?rdbms=postgres_10&fiddle=64542f2d987d3ce0d85bbc40ddadf7d6>*
- Please
note that the queries/functions might look silly/pointless, I extracted the
performance issue I am seeing to a minimal reproducible example.

I have the following schema:

create table parent
(
    id           int    primary key
);
create table child
(
    id           int    primary key,
    parent_id    int    references parent(id)
);
create index on child(parent_id);

Let's start with the following inlinable setof-returning function which
basically returns the child rows for a given parent identifier:

create function child_get_1(int) returns table(a int) as
$$
    select    child.id
    from      child
    left join parent
    on        parent.id = child.parent_id
    where     child.parent_id = $1;
$$
language sql stable;

Note that the left join branch is intentionally not used, and thus could be
eliminated by the planner.

When executing the following query, I get a satisfying hash (left) join
(and the left join to parent is indeed eliminated):

explain analyze
select ch.* from parent p, child_get_1(p.id) ch;

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Hash Join  (cost=3.25..17163.23 rows=999900 width=4) (actual
time=0.025..194.279 rows=999900 loops=1)              |
|   Hash Cond: (child.parent_id = p.id)
                                          |
|   ->  Seq Scan on child  (cost=0.00..14424.00 rows=999900 width=8)
(actual time=0.005..47.215 rows=999900 loops=1) |
|   ->  Hash  (cost=2.00..2.00 rows=100 width=4) (actual time=0.016..0.016
rows=100 loops=1)                         |
|         Buckets: 1024  Batches: 1  Memory Usage: 12kB
                                          |
|         ->  Seq Scan on parent p  (cost=0.00..2.00 rows=100 width=4)
(actual time=0.001..0.007 rows=100 loops=1)   |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+


Now, I introduce a convenience function, also inlinable, which fetches the
child rows by its parent id:

create function t(int) returns setof child as
$$
    select child.* from child where child.parent_id = $1;
$$
language sql stable;

I refactor `child_get_1(int)` from above as following:

create function child_get_2(int) returns table(a int) as
$$
    select    child.id
    from      t($1) child
    left join parent
    on        parent.id = child.parent_id;
$$
language sql stable;

explain analyze
select ch.* from parent p, child_get_2(p.id) ch;

Now, I get a nested loop, which as expected performs quite badly:

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Nested Loop  (cost=189.92..493990.48 rows=999900 width=4) (actual
time=1.519..713.680 rows=999900 loops=1)                                 |
|   ->  Seq Scan on parent p  (cost=0.00..2.00 rows=100 width=4) (actual
time=0.004..0.081 rows=100 loops=1)                                 |
|   ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on child  (cost=189.92..4739.90 rows=9999 width=4)
(actual time=1.365..6.332 rows=9999 loops=100)                   |
|         Recheck Cond: (parent_id = p.id)
                                                                 |
|         Heap Blocks: exact=442476
                                                                  |
|         ->  Bitmap Index Scan on child_parent_id_idx  (cost=0.00..187.42
rows=9999 width=0) (actual time=0.838..0.838 rows=9999 loops=100) |
|               Index Cond: (parent_id = p.id)
                                                                 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

For some reason I cannot explain we now end up with a nested loop, instead
an hash join. The fairly trivial introduction of `t(int)` messes up with
reordering, but I fail to see why. I manually upped the from and join
collapse limit to 32 - just to be sure -, but no effect. Also, the left
join branch could not be eliminated. I believe this is related to the usage
of the implicit lateral join to `child_get_2(p.id)` in the main query,
which somehow messes up with the reordering of `from t($1) as child` in
`child_get_2(int)`, though I am not 100% sure.

Also, note that when we apply an inner join instead of a left join, the
problem goes away. The planner now manages to end up with a hash join in
both cases.

I am seeing this on v10 and v11.

Any ideas?

Thank you. Best regards.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.