For correctness of summarization results, it is critical that the
snapshot used during the summarization scan is able to see all tuples
that are live to all transactions -- including tuples inserted or
deleted by in-progress transactions. Otherwise, it would be possible
for a transaction to insert a tuple, then idle for a long time while a
concurrent transaction executes summarization of the range: this would
result in the inserted value not being considered in the summary.
Previously we were trying to use a MVCC snapshot in conjunction with
adding a "placeholder" tuple in the index: the snapshot would see all
committed tuples, and the placeholder tuple would catch insertions by
any new inserters. The hole is that prior insertions by transactions
that are still in progress by the time the MVCC snapshot was taken were
ignored.
Kevin Grittner reported this as a bogus error message during vacuum with
default transaction isolation mode set to repeatable read (because the
error report mentioned a function name not being invoked during), but
the problem is larger than that.
To fix, tweak IndexBuildHeapRangeScan to have a new mode that behaves
the way we need using SnapshotAny visibility rules. This change
simplifies the BRIN code a bit, mainly by removing large comments that
were mistaken. Instead, rely on the SnapshotAny semantics to provide
what it needs. (The business about a placeholder tuple needs to remain:
that covers the case that a transaction inserts a a tuple in a page that
summarization already scanned.)
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20150731175700.GX2441@postgresql.org
In passing, remove a couple of unused declarations from brin.h and
reword a comment to be proper English. This part submitted by Kevin
Grittner.
Backpatch to 9.5, where BRIN was introduced.
Per the discussion in optimizer/README, it's unsafe to reassociate anything
into or out of the RHS of a SEMI or ANTI join. An example from Piotr
Stefaniak showed that join_is_legal() wasn't sufficiently enforcing this
rule, so lock it down a little harder.
I couldn't find a reasonably simple example of the optimizer trying to
do this, so no new regression test. (Piotr's example involved the random
search in GEQO accidentally trying an invalid case and triggering a sanity
check way downstream in clause selectivity estimation, which did not seem
like a sequence of events that would be useful to memorialize in a
regression test as-is.)
Back-patch to all active branches.
Previously the message erroneously printed the same LSN twice as the
assignment to the start_lsn variable was before the message. Correct
that.
Reported-By: Marko Tiikkaja
Author: Marko Tiikkaja
Backpatch: 9.5, where logical decoding was introduced
The tuplesort/tuplestore memory management logic assumed that the chunk
allocation overhead for its memtuples array could not increase when
increasing the array size. This is and always was true for tuplesort,
but we (I, I think) blindly copied that logic into tuplestore.c without
noticing that the assumption failed to hold for the much smaller array
elements used by tuplestore. Given rather small work_mem, this could
result in an improper complaint about "unexpected out-of-memory situation",
as reported by Brent DeSpain in bug #13530.
The easiest way to fix this is just to increase tuplestore's initial
array size so that the assumption holds. Rather than relying on magic
constants, though, let's export a #define from aset.c that represents
the safe allocation threshold, and make tuplestore's calculation depend
on that.
Do the same in tuplesort.c to keep the logic looking parallel, even though
tuplesort.c isn't actually at risk at present. This will keep us from
breaking it if we ever muck with the allocation parameters in aset.c.
Back-patch to all supported versions. The error message doesn't occur
pre-9.3, not so much because the problem can't happen as because the
pre-9.3 tuplestore code neglected to check for it. (The chance of
trouble is a great deal larger as of 9.3, though, due to changes in the
array-size-increasing strategy.) However, allowing LACKMEM() to become
true unexpectedly could still result in less-than-desirable behavior,
so let's patch it all the way back.
In commit b514a7460d, I changed the planner
so that it would allow nestloop paths to remain partially parameterized,
ie the inner relation might need parameters from both the current outer
relation and some upper-level outer relation. That's fine so long as we're
talking about distinct parameters; but the patch also allowed creation of
nestloop paths for cases where the inner relation's parameter was a
PlaceHolderVar whose eval_at set included the current outer relation and
some upper-level one. That does *not* work.
In principle we could allow such a PlaceHolderVar to be evaluated at the
lower join node using values passed down from the upper relation along with
values from the join's own outer relation. However, nodeNestloop.c only
supports simple Vars not arbitrary expressions as nestloop parameters.
createplan.c is also a few bricks shy of being able to handle such cases;
it misplaces the PlaceHolderVar parameters in the plan tree, which is why
the visible symptoms of this bug are "plan should not reference subplan's
variable" and "failed to assign all NestLoopParams to plan nodes" planner
errors.
Adding the necessary complexity to make this work doesn't seem like it
would be repaid in significantly better plans, because in cases where such
a PHV exists, there is probably a corresponding join order constraint that
would allow a good plan to be found without using the star-schema exception.
Furthermore, adding complexity to nodeNestloop.c would create a run-time
penalty even for plans where this whole consideration is irrelevant.
So let's just reject such paths instead.
Per fuzz testing by Andreas Seltenreich; the added regression test is based
on his example query. Back-patch to 9.2, like the previous patch.
It must be possible to multiply wal_buffers by XLOG_BLCKSZ without
overflowing int, or calculations in StartupXLOG will go badly wrong
and crash the server. Avoid that by imposing a maximum value on
wal_buffers. This will be just under 2GB, assuming the usual value
for XLOG_BLCKSZ.
Josh Berkus, per an analysis by Andrew Gierth.
Only remove the default deny policy when a permissive policy exists
(either from the hook or defined by the user). If only restrictive
policies exist then no rows will be visible, as restrictive policies
shouldn't make rows visible. To address this requirement, a single
"USING (true)" permissive policy can be created.
Update the test_rls_hooks regression tests to create the necessary
"USING (true)" permissive policy.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was added.
Per discussion with Dean.
If tablespace_map file is present without backup_label file, there is
no use of such file. There is no harm in retaining it, but it is better
to get rid of the map file so that we don't have any redundant file
in data directory and it will avoid any sort of confusion. It seems
prudent though to just rename the file out of the way rather than
delete it completely, also we ignore any error that occurs in rename
operation as even if map file is present without backup_label file,
it is harmless.
Back-patch to 9.5 where tablespace_map file was introduced.
Amit Kapila, reviewed by Robert Haas, Alvaro Herrera and me.
It's against project policy to use elog() for user-facing errors, or to
omit an errcode() selection for errors that aren't supposed to be "can't
happen" cases. Fix all the violations of this policy that result in
ERRCODE_INTERNAL_ERROR log entries during the standard regression tests,
as errors that can reliably be triggered from SQL surely should be
considered user-facing.
I also looked through all the files touched by this commit and fixed
other nearby problems of the same ilk. I do not claim to have fixed
all violations of the policy, just the ones in these files.
In a few places I also changed existing ERRCODE choices that didn't
seem particularly appropriate; mainly replacing ERRCODE_SYNTAX_ERROR
by something more specific.
Back-patch to 9.5, but no further; changing ERRCODE assignments in
stable branches doesn't seem like a good idea.
As in commit 0a52d378b0, avoid doing something that has undefined
results according to the C standard, even though in practice there does
not seem to be any problem with it.
This fixes two places in numeric.c that demonstrably could call memcpy()
with such arguments. I looked through that file and didn't see any other
places with similar hazards; this is not to claim that there are not such
places in other files.
Per report from Piotr Stefaniak. Back-patch to 9.5 which is where the
previous commit was added. We're more or less setting a precedent that
we will not worry about this type of issue in pre-9.5 branches unless
someone demonstrates a problem in the field.
Commit c9b0cbe98b accidentally broke the
order of operations during postmaster shutdown: it resulted in removing
the per-socket lockfiles after, not before, postmaster.pid. This creates
a race-condition hazard for a new postmaster that's started immediately
after observing that postmaster.pid has disappeared; if it sees the
socket lockfile still present, it will quite properly refuse to start.
This error appears to be the explanation for at least some of the
intermittent buildfarm failures we've seen in the pg_upgrade test.
Another problem, which has been there all along, is that the postmaster
has never bothered to close() its listen sockets, but has just allowed them
to close at process death. This creates a different race condition for an
incoming postmaster: it might be unable to bind to the desired listen
address because the old postmaster is still incumbent. This might explain
some odd failures we've seen in the past, too. (Note: this is not related
to the fact that individual backends don't close their client communication
sockets. That behavior is intentional and is not changed by this patch.)
Fix by adding an on_proc_exit function that closes the postmaster's ports
explicitly, and (in 9.3 and up) reshuffling the responsibility for where
to unlink the Unix socket files. Lock file unlinking can stay where it
is, but teach it to unlink the lock files in reverse order of creation.
If a call to WaitForXLogInsertionsToFinish() returned a value in the middle
of a page, and another backend then started to insert a record to the same
page, and then you called WaitXLogInsertionsToFinish() again, the second
call might return a smaller value than the first call. The problem was in
GetXLogBuffer(), which always updated the insertingAt value to the
beginning of the requested page, not the actual requested location. Because
of that, the second call might return a xlog pointer to the beginning of
the page, while the first one returned a later position on the same page.
XLogFlush() performs two calls to WaitXLogInsertionsToFinish() in
succession, and holds WALWriteLock on the second call, which can deadlock
if the second call to WaitXLogInsertionsToFinish() blocks.
Reported by Spiros Ioannou. Backpatch to 9.4, where the more scalable
WALInsertLock mechanism, and this bug, was introduced.
LWLockAttemptLock pointlessly read the lock's state in every loop
iteration, even though pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u32() returns the old
value. Instead do that only once before the loop iteration.
Additionally there's no need to have the expected_state variable,
old_state mostly had the same value anyway.
Noticed-By: Heikki Linnakangas
Backpatch: 9.5, no reason to let the branches diverge at this point
The lwlock scalability work introduced two race conditions into the
lwlock variable support provided for xlog.c. First, and harmlessly on
most platforms, it set/read the variable without the spinlock in some
places. Secondly, due to the removal of the spinlock, it was possible
that a backend missed changes to the variable's state if it changed in
the wrong moment because checking the lock's state, the variable's state
and the queuing are not protected by a single spinlock acquisition
anymore.
To fix first move resetting the variable's from LWLockAcquireWithVar to
WALInsertLockRelease, via a new function LWLockReleaseClearVar. That
prevents issues around waiting for a variable's value to change when a
new locker has acquired the lock, but not yet set the value. Secondly
re-check that the variable hasn't changed after enqueing, that prevents
the issue that the lock has been released and already re-acquired by the
time the woken up backend checks for the lock's state.
Reported-By: Jeff Janes
Analyzed-By: Heikki Linnakangas
Reviewed-By: Heikki Linnakangas
Discussion: 5592DB35.2060401@iki.fi
Backpatch: 9.5, where the lwlock scalability went in
An outer join clause that didn't actually reference the RHS (perhaps only
after constant-folding) could confuse the join order enforcement logic,
leading to wrong query results. Also, nested occurrences of such things
could trigger an Assertion that on reflection seems incorrect.
Per fuzz testing by Andreas Seltenreich. The practical use of such cases
seems thin enough that it's not too surprising we've not heard field
reports about it.
This has been broken for a long time, so back-patch to all active branches.
Per complaint from Peter Holzer. It's useful to cover this special case,
since for a boolean variable "foo", earlier parts of the planner will have
reduced variants like "foo = true" to just "foo", and thus we may fail
to recognize the applicability of a partial index with predicate
"foo IS NOT NULL".
Back-patch to 9.5, but not further; given the lack of previous complaints
this doesn't seem like behavior to change in stable branches.
In many cases, we can implement a semijoin as a plain innerjoin by first
passing the righthand-side relation through a unique-ification step.
However, one of the cases where this does NOT work is where the RHS has
a LATERAL reference to the LHS; that makes the RHS dependent on the LHS
so that unique-ification is meaningless. joinpath.c understood this,
and so would not generate any join paths of this kind ... but join_is_legal
neglected to check for the case, so it would think that we could do it.
The upshot would be a "could not devise a query plan for the given query"
failure once we had failed to generate any join paths at all for the bogus
join pair.
Back-patch to 9.3 where LATERAL was added.
The code was assuming that any NULL value in scan keys was due to IS
NULL or IS NOT NULL, but it turns out to be possible to get them with
other operators too, if they are used in contrived-enough ways. Easiest
way out of the problem seems to check explicitely for the IS NOT NULL
flag, instead of assuming it must be set if the IS NULL flag is not set,
when a null scan key is found; if neither flag is set, follow the lead
of other index AMs and assume that all indexable operators must be
strict, and thus the query is never satisfiable.
Also, add a comment to try and lure some future hacker into improving
analysis of scan keys in brin.
Per report from Andreas Seltenreich; diagnosis by Tom Lane.
Backpatch to 9.5.
Discussion: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20646.1437919632@sss.pgh.pa.us
When retrieving policies, if not working on the root target relation,
we actually want the relation's SELECT policies, regardless of
the top level query command type. For example in UPDATE t1...FROM t2
we need to apply t1's UPDATE policies and t2's SELECT policies.
Previously top level query command type was applied to all relations,
which was wrong. Add some regression coverage to ensure we don't
violate this principle in the future.
Report and patch by Dean Rasheed. Cherry picked from larger refactoring
patch and tweaked by me. Back-patched to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
Although I think on all modern machines floating division by zero
results in Infinity not SIGFPE, we still don't want infinities
running around in the planner's costing estimates; too much risk
of that leading to insane behavior.
grouping_planner() failed to consider the possibility that final_rel
might be known dummy and hence have zero rowcount. (I wonder if it
would be better to set a rows estimate of 1 for dummy relations?
But at least in the back branches, changing this convention seems
like a bad idea, so I'll leave that for another day.)
Make certain that get_variable_numdistinct() produces a nonzero result.
The case that can be shown to be broken is with stadistinct < 0.0 and
small ntuples; we did not prevent the result from rounding to zero.
For good luck I applied clamp_row_est() to all the nonconstant return
values.
In ExecChooseHashTableSize(), Assert that we compute positive nbuckets
and nbatch. I know of no reason to think this isn't the case, but it
seems like a good safety check.
Per reports from Piotr Stefaniak. Back-patch to all active branches.
Policy USING and WITH CHECK expressions were using EXPR_KIND_WHERE for
parse analysis, which results in inappropriate ERROR messages when
the expression contains unsupported constructs such as aggregates.
Create a new ParseExprKind called EXPR_KIND_POLICY and tailor the
related messages to fit.
Reported by Noah Misch. Reviewed by Dean Rasheed, Alvaro Herrera,
and Robert Haas. Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
AlterPolicy() and CreatePolicy() lacked their respective hook invocations.
Noted by Noah Misch, review by Dean Rasheed. Back-patch to 9.5 where
RLS was introduced.
When DefineQueryRewrite() is about to convert a table to a view, it checks
the table for features unavailable to views. For example, it rejects tables
having triggers. It omits to reject tables having relrowsecurity or a
pg_policy record. Fix that. To faciliate the repair, invent
relation_has_policies() which indicates the presence of policies on a
relation even when row security is disabled for that relation.
Reported by Noah Misch. Patch by me, review by Stephen Frost. Back-patch
to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
CreatePolicy() and AlterPolicy() omit to create a pg_shdepend entry for
each role in the TO clause. Fix this by creating a new shared dependency
type called SHARED_DEPENDENCY_POLICY and assigning it to each role.
Reported by Noah Misch. Patch by me, reviewed by Alvaro Herrera.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
The previous code resulted in memory access beyond the path bounds. The
cure is to move it into a code branch that checks the value of lex_level
is within the correct bounds.
Bug reported and diagnosed by Piotr Stefaniak.
Don't print a WARNING if we get ESRCH from a kill() that's attempting
to cancel an autovacuum worker. It's possible (and has been seen in the
buildfarm) that the worker is already gone by the time we are able to
execute the kill, in which case the failure is harmless. About the only
plausible reason for reporting such cases would be to help debug corrupted
lock table contents, but this is hardly likely to be the most important
symptom if that happens. Moreover issuing a WARNING might scare users
more than is warranted.
Also, since sending a signal to an autovacuum worker is now entirely a
routine thing, and the worker will log the query cancel on its end anyway,
reduce the message saying we're doing that from LOG to DEBUG1 level.
Very minor cosmetic cleanup as well.
Since the main practical reason for doing this is to avoid unnecessary
buildfarm failures, back-patch to all active branches.
The pg_stats view is supposed to be restricted to only show rows
about tables the user can read. However, it sometimes can leak
information which could not otherwise be seen when row level security
is enabled. Fix that by not showing pg_stats rows to users that would
be subject to RLS on the table the row is related to. This is done
by creating/using the newly introduced SQL visible function,
row_security_active().
Along the way, clean up three call sites of check_enable_rls(). The second
argument of that function should only be specified as other than
InvalidOid when we are checking as a different user than the current one,
as in when querying through a view. These sites were passing GetUserId()
instead of InvalidOid, which can cause the function to return incorrect
results if the current user has the BYPASSRLS privilege and row_security
has been set to OFF.
Additionally fix a bug causing RI Trigger error messages to unintentionally
leak information when RLS is enabled, and other minor cleanup and
improvements. Also add WITH (security_barrier) to the definition of pg_stats.
Bumped CATVERSION due to new SQL functions and pg_stats view definition.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was introduced. Reported by Yaroslav.
Patch by Joe Conway and Dean Rasheed with review and input by
Michael Paquier and Stephen Frost.
While postgres' use of SSL renegotiation is a good idea in theory, it
turned out to not work well in practice. The specification and openssl's
implementation of it have lead to several security issues. Postgres' use
of renegotiation also had its share of bugs.
Additionally OpenSSL has a bunch of bugs around renegotiation, reported
and open for years, that regularly lead to connections breaking with
obscure error messages. We tried increasingly complex workarounds to get
around these bugs, but we didn't find anything complete.
Since these connection breakages often lead to hard to debug problems,
e.g. spuriously failing base backups and significant latency spikes when
synchronous replication is used, we have decided to change the default
setting for ssl renegotiation to 0 (disabled) in the released
backbranches and remove it entirely in 9.5 and master.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: 20150624144148.GQ4797@alap3.anarazel.de
Backpatch: 9.5 and master, 9.0-9.4 get a different patch
join_clause_is_movable_into() is approximate, in the sense that it might
sometimes return "false" when actually it would be valid to push the given
join clause down to the specified level. This is okay ... but there was
an Assert in get_joinrel_parampathinfo() that's only safe if the answers
are always exact. Comment out the Assert, and add a bunch of commentary
to clarify what's going on.
Per fuzz testing by Andreas Seltenreich. The added regression test is
a pretty silly query, but it's based on his crasher example.
Back-patch to 9.2 where the faulty logic was introduced.
To avoid a race condition where the relation being COPY'd could be
changed into a view or otherwise modified, keep the original lock
on the relation. Further, fully qualify the relation when building
the query up.
Also remove the poorly thought-out Assert() and check the entire
relationOids list as, post-RLS, there can certainly be multiple
relations involved and the planner does not guarantee their ordering.
Per discussion with Noah and Andres.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
Fix additional bogosity in commit 9029f4b374. Include the
BackendSslStatusBuffer in the BackendStatusShmemSize calculation,
avoid ugly and error-prone casts to char* and back, put related
code stanzas into a consistent order (and fix a couple of previous
instances of that sin). All cosmetic except for the size oversight.
It does currently, and I don't see us changing that any time soon, but we
don't make that assumption anywhere else.
Per Tom Lane's suggestion. Backpatch to 9.2, like the previous patch that
added this assumption.
XLogReaderFree failed to free the per-block data buffers, when they
happened to not be used by the latest read WAL record.
Michael Paquier. Backpatch to 9.5, where the per-block buffers were added.
In GIN, an all-zeros page would be leaked forever, and never reused. Just
add them to the FSM in vacuum, and they will be reinitialized when grabbed
from the FSM. On master and 9.5, attempting to access the page's opaque
struct also caused an assertion failure, although that was otherwise
harmless.
Reported by Jeff Janes. Backpatch to all supported versions.
SP-GiST initialized an all-zeros page at vacuum, but that was not
WAL-logged, which is not safe. You might get a torn page write, when it gets
flushed to disk, and end-up with a half-initialized index page. To fix,
leave it in the all-zeros state, and add it to the FSM. It will be
initialized when reused. Also don't set the page-deleted flag when recycling
an empty page. That was also not WAL-logged, and a torn write of that would
cause the page to have an invalid checksum.
Backpatch to 9.2, where SP-GiST indexes were added.
That was otherwise harmless, but tripped the new assertion in
PageGetSpecialPointer().
Reported by Amit Langote. Backpatch to 9.5, where the assertion was added.
There is no full discussion of speculative insertions in the executor
README. There is a high-level explanation in execIndexing.c, but it doesn't
seem necessary to refer it from here.
Peter Geoghegan
I missed a restriction that commit f4abd0241d
should have enforced: we can't pull up an empty-FROM subquery if it's under
an outer join, because then we'd need to wrap its output columns in
PlaceHolderVars. As the code currently stands, the PHVs end up with empty
relid sets, which doesn't work (and is correctly caught by an Assert).
It's possible that this could be fixed by assigning the PHVs the relid
sets of the parent FromExpr/JoinExpr, but getting that to work is more
complication than I care to add right now; indeed it's likely that
we'll never bother, since pulling up empty-FROM subqueries is a rather
marginal optimization anyway.
Per report from Andreas Seltenreich. Back-patch to 9.5 where the faulty
code was added.
The planner generally expects that the estimated rowcount of any relation
is at least one row, *unless* it has been proven empty by constraint
exclusion or similar mechanisms, which is marked by installing a dummy path
as the rel's cheapest path (cf. IS_DUMMY_REL). When I split up
allpaths.c's processing of base rels into separate set_base_rel_sizes and
set_base_rel_pathlists steps, the intention was that dummy rels would get
marked as such during the "set size" step; this is what justifies an Assert
in indxpath.c's get_loop_count that other relations should either be dummy
or have positive rowcount. Unfortunately I didn't get that quite right
for append relations: if all the child rels have been proven empty then
set_append_rel_size would come up with a rowcount of zero, which is
correct, but it didn't then do set_dummy_rel_pathlist. (We would have
ended up with the right state after set_append_rel_pathlist, but that's
too late, if we generate indexpaths for some other rel first.)
In addition to fixing the actual bug, I installed an Assert enforcing this
convention in set_rel_size; that then allows simplification of a couple
of now-redundant tests for zero rowcount in set_append_rel_size.
Also, to cover the possibility that third-party FDWs have been careless
about not returning a zero rowcount estimate, apply clamp_row_est to
whatever an FDW comes up with as the rows estimate.
Per report from Andreas Seltenreich. Back-patch to 9.2. Earlier branches
did not have the separation between set_base_rel_sizes and
set_base_rel_pathlists steps, so there was no intermediate state where an
appendrel would have had inconsistent rowcount and pathlist. It's possible
that adding the Assert to set_rel_size would be a good idea in older
branches too; but since they're not under development any more, it's likely
not worth the trouble.
ON CONFLICT unique index inference had a thinko that could affect cases
where the user-supplied inference clause required that an attribute
match a particular (user specified) collation and/or opclass.
infer_collation_opclass_match() has to check for opclass and/or
collation matches and that the attribute is in the list of attributes or
expressions known to be in the definition of the index under
consideration. The bug was that these two conditions weren't necessarily
evaluated for the same index attribute.
Author: Peter Geoghegan
Discussion: CAM3SWZR4uug=WvmGk7UgsqHn2MkEzy9YU-+8jKGO4JPhesyeWg@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 9.5, where ON CONFLICT was introduced
Previously nested grouping set specifications accidentally weren't
flattened, but instead contained the nested specification as a element
in the outer list.
Fix this by, as actually documented in comments, concatenating the
nested set specification into the outer one. Also add tests to prevent
this from breaking again.
Author: Andrew Gierth, with tests from Jeevan Chalke
Reported-By: Jeevan Chalke
Discussion: CAM2+6=V5YvuxB+EyN4iH=GbD-XTA435TCNvnDFSD--YvXs+pww@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 9.5, where grouping sets were introduced
Previously we disallowed pushing down quals to WHERE in the presence of
grouping sets. That's overly restrictive.
We now instead copy quals to WHERE if applicable, leaving the
one in HAVING in place. That's because, at that stage of the planning
process, it's nontrivial to determine if it's safe to remove the one in
HAVING.
Author: Andrew Gierth
Discussion: 874mkt3l59.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Backpatch: 9.5, where grouping sets were introduced. This isn't exactly
a bugfix, but it seems better to keep the branches in sync at this point.
Previously GROUPING() was not recognized as a aggregate expression,
erroneously allowing the planner to move it from HAVING to WHERE.
Author: Jeevan Chalke
Reviewed-By: Andrew Gierth
Discussion: CAM2+6=WG9omG5rFOMAYBweJxmpTaapvVp5pCeMrE6BfpCwr4Og@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 9.5, where grouping sets were introduced
Alvaro Herrera