Returning inserted rows (and updated and deleted)
Comments (2) Visits (6094)
Remember the days when DB2 re-entered the TPC-C fight after a long hiatus?
The time was DB2 8.1 FP4. I seriously do not remember years.. Time passes in releases.
While my colleagues were tuning code path, bufferpools disks my team was looking at something more fundamental.
What can we do to make SQL as efficient as possible for TPC-C.
And ideally how can we make SQL more efficient for any class of OLTP workload.
In other words how can we pour the most bang into the least SQL for a typical OLTP transaction?
The result was what we called the new SQL.
If I recall correctly it consisted out of the following enhancements:
In this post I want to dive into the last bullet.
DB2 8.1 FP4 was a long time ago, but there are still developers who are not yet familiar with this powerful feature.
So it warrants some attention.
One very common task in an OLTP system is that of order processing.
You can distinguish between three phases of order processing
Taking an order
Taking an order is comprised of:
This is where the inline table function came in in TPC-C.
Our schema is simple:
CREATE TABLE order(order_id INTEGER NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY, stamp TIMESTAMP DEFAULT CURRENT TIMESTAMP, name VARCHAR(20),
To submit an order an order-id must be generated.
Different ways to do so exist is various products:
Either two SQL Statements need to be executed or the statement need to comply with very specific properties: E.g. single row insert with identity column.
As a response to this problem each some vendors have invented extensions to INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE such as a WITH RETURN clause.
The purpose of the clause is to pick up on new, changed or deleted rows and pass them back to the client or insert them into a table or variable.
The approach we took in DB2 has been radically different.
CREATE OR REPLACE SEQUENCE order_seq; SELECT order_id, stamp FROM NEW TABLE(INSERT INTO order(order_id, name, price) VALUES(NEXT VALUE FOR order_seq, 'John', 1000)); ORDER_ID STAMP ----------- ----
What we did in DB2 was to simply expose the trigger transition table NEW TABLE in the from-clause.
So, when you put an INSERT statement into the from clause that insert statement is executed and in the process a transition table is produced.
That transition table, which includes all the modifications of any before triggers can then be queried.
Note in the example above that we did not only pick up the generated "ORDER_ID", but also the value generated for the "STAMP" column.
How is that different from an INSERT WITH RETURN as available in Oracle?
INSERT WITH RETURN requires an INTO clause. That is the returned values must leave SQL and be returned into a variable.
Once they are returned you can re-scan them for further processing.
Pushing INSERT into the from clause allows for the full power of SQL to be applied for further processing.
Any client language that knows how to process a cursor can immediately use the feature.
DB2 can handle multiple order inserts:
SELECT order_id, stamp FROM NEW TABLE(INSERT INTO order(order_id, name, price) VALUES(NEXT VALUE FOR order_seq, 'John', 1000), (NEXT VALUE FOR order_seq, 'Beth', 500), (NEXT VALUE FOR order_seq, 'John', 1200)); ORDER_ID STAMP
Better yet, DB2 can process the result. For example it can do totals on the orders:
SELECT order_id, stamp, name, sum(price) over(order by order_id) as total_price FROM NEW TABLE(INSERT INTO order(order_id, name, price) VALUES(NEXT VALUE FOR order_seq, 'John', 1000), (NEXT VALUE FOR order_seq, 'Beth', 500), (NEXT VALUE FOR order_seq, 'John', 1200), (NEXT VALUE FOR order_seq, 'Beth', 700), (NEXT VALUE FOR order_seq, 'Jack', 1100)); ORDER_ID STAMP NAME TOTAL_PRICE
The question which you should immediately ask is:
What is the overhead of NEW TABLE?
How is this different than inserting the rows into an array or temp table and then rescanning that array?
An explain of the statement above will show:
Rows RETURN ( 1) Cost I/O | 5 TBSCAN ( 2) 6.7822 1 | 5 SORT ( 3) 6.78117 1 | 5 TBSCAN ( 4) 6.77634 1 | 5 SORT ( 5) 6.7753 1 | 5 INSERT ( 6) 6.77286 1 /------+------\ 5 0 TBSCAN TABLE: ADMINISTRATOR ( 7) ORDER 8.88007e-005 Q5 0 | 5 TABFNC: SYSIBM GENROW Q1
Note the absence of any temp here. The INSERT (6) serves immediately as the input for the OLAP function.
SORT (5) handles the "ORDER BY order_id" of the SUM.
SORT (3) however is interesting:
3) SORT : (Sort) ... SORTKEY : (Sort Key column) NONE
This SORT doesn't actually sort. All it does is to force the cursor to be INSENSITIVE.
This assures that the INSERT is completed when the cursor is OPENed.
A common technique is to open such cursors as WITH HOLD and then COMMIT before first fetch.
That way no locks are being held while the cursor is being fetched.
Dispatching an order
After the order has been accepted it needs to be processed.
This can either happen in a single database transaction or the workflow can consist of multiple transaction.
In the second case the order needs to be marked on the queue as being processed.
Only once the processing is completed in a later transaction can it be deleted.
Let's assume there are multiple agents who are fulfilling orders.
Here is an efficient way to do that using the same technology as described for INSERT with an UPDATE statement.
CREATE OR REPLACE VARIABLE my_agent_id INTEGER; SET my_agent_id = 1; SELECT order_id, stamp, name, price FROM OLD TABLE(UPDATE (SELECT * FROM order WHERE agent_id IS NULL
We have select the oldest order which is unassigned (order_id IS NULL).
That order has been updated with the local agent_id and the row has then been returned as a query.
Note the usage of OLD TABLE here. You can choose either the NEW or OLD transition table for UPDATE operations.
Generally the optimizer plan is better when you use the OLD TABLE whenever possible whenever the subject of the UPDATE is not a base table.
The plan is very tight:
Rows RETURN ( 1) Cost I/O | 1 TBSCAN ( 2) 13.5567 2 | 1 SORT ( 3) 13.5561 2 | 1 UPDATE ( 4) 13.5549 2 /-----+-----\ 1 9 FETCH TABLE: ADMINISTRATOR ( 5) ORDER 6.79517 Q1 1 /-----+------\ 9 9 IXSCAN TABLE: ADMINISTRATOR ( 6) ORDER 0.0205156 Q2 0 | 9 INDEX: SYSIBM SQL120509220520090 Q2
After the cursor is opened the transaction can immediately be committed.
As a result update locks are held a minimal amount of time with no chance of a deadlock.
Deleting an order
Once the order has been fulfilled it can easily be deleted from the queue by orde
For the sake of this exercise however, let's assume we want to delete the order from the order table and archive it in a separate table.
WITH del AS (SELECT * FROM OLD TABLE(DELETE FROM order WHERE order_id = 1)) SELECT fulfilled
What we have built here is a pipeline of actions.
First we DELETE the order we have finished processing.
But we interrogate the OLD transition table to pass that information on to the order_archive table.
Finally we capture the timestamp when the order was fulfilled from the NEW transition table of the order_archive table.
Theoretically this could all be written in one nested query.
But these statements can be very complex.
What if the query contained joins where the table is updated and select from in the same query?
What if the same table is modified multiple times?
Therefore DB2 restricts NEW TABLE and OLD TABLE to occur in nested queries or in the presence of joins.
Placing them into common table expressions however is allowed.
Common table expressions provide a natural order.
So if there are conflicts DB2 will execute each query in the WITH clause at a time in order of specification.
If however there are no conflicts DB2 can provide a very efficient access path:
Rows RETURN ( 1) Cost I/O | 1 TBSCAN ( 2) 20.3274 3 | 1 SORT ( 3) 20.3268 3 | 1 INSERT ( 4) 20.3256 3 /-----+-----\ 1 1 DELETE TABLE: ADMINISTRATOR ( 5) ORDER_ARCHIVE 13.5558 Q6 2 /-----+-----\ 1 9 FETCH TABLE: ADMINISTRATOR ( 6) ORDER 6.78603 Q1 1 /-----+-----\ 1 9 IXSCAN TABLE: ADMINISTRATOR ( 7) ORDER 0.015546 Q2 0 | 9 INDEX: SYSIBM SQL120509220520090 Q2
Note how the DELETE and INSERT are stacked!
You can use the same technique also to stack INSERTs.
For example to split a staging table across multiple target tables.
I'll save that one for another day though since it will introduce another fancy clause..