The previous coding attempted to activate all the GUC settings specified
in SET clauses, so that the function validator could operate in the GUC
environment expected by the function body. However, this is problematic
when restoring a dump, since the SET clauses might refer to database
objects that don't exist yet. We already have the parameter
check_function_bodies that's meant to prevent forward references in
function definitions from breaking dumps, so let's change CREATE FUNCTION
to not install the SET values if check_function_bodies is off.
Authors of function validators were already advised not to make any
"context sensitive" checks when check_function_bodies is off, if indeed
they're checking anything at all in that mode. But extend the
documentation to point out the GUC issue in particular.
(Note that we still check the SET clauses to some extent; the behavior
with !check_function_bodies is now approximately equivalent to what ALTER
DATABASE/ROLE have been doing for awhile with context-dependent GUCs.)
This problem can be demonstrated in all active branches, so back-patch
all the way.
Previously, pg_upgrade docs recommended using .pgpass if using MD5
authentication to avoid being prompted for a password. Turns out pg_ctl
never prompts for a password, so MD5 requires .pgpass --- document that.
Also recommend 'peer' for authentication too.
Backpatch back to 9.1.
Make it easier for readers of the FP docs to find out about possibly
truncated values.
Per complaint from Tom Duffey in message
F0E0F874-C86F-48D1-AA2A-0C5365BF5118@trillitech.com
Author: Albe Laurenz
Reviewed by: Abhijit Menon-Sen
Adjust the wording in the first para of "Sequence Manipulation Functions"
so that neither of the link phrases in it break across line boundaries,
in either A4- or US-page-size PDF output. This fixes a reported build
failure for the 9.3beta2 A4 PDF docs, and future-proofs this particular
para against causing similar problems in future. (Perhaps somebody will
fix this issue in the SGML/TeX documentation tool chain someday, but I'm
not holding my breath.)
Back-patch to all supported branches, since the same problem could rise up
to bite us in future updates if anyone changes anything earlier than this
in func.sgml.
ALTER TABLE .. VALIDATE CONSTRAINT previously
gave incorrect details about lock levels and
therefore incomplete reasons to use the option.
Initial bug report and fix from Marko Tiikkaja
Reworded by me to include comments by Kevin Grittner
Per discussion, this restriction isn't needed for any real security reason,
and it seems to confuse people more often than it helps them. It could
also result in some database states being unrestorable. So just drop it.
Back-patch to 9.0, where ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES was introduced.
The documentation for ALTER TYPE .. RENAME claimed to support a
RESTRICT/CASCADE option at the 'type' level, which wasn't implemented
and doesn't make a whole lot of sense to begin with. What is supported,
and previously undocumented, is
ALTER TYPE .. RENAME ATTRIBUTE .. RESTRICT/CASCADE.
I've updated the documentation and back-patched this to 9.1 where it was
first introduced.
Restore 4-byte designation for docs. Fix 9.3 doc query to properly pad
to four digits.
Backpatch to all active branches
Per suggestions from Ian Lawrence Barwick
I changed this in commit fd15dba543, but
missed the fact that the SGML documentation of the function specified
exactly what it did. Well, one of the two places where it's specified
documented that --- probably I looked at the other place and thought
nothing needed to be done. Sync the two places where encode() and
decode() are described.
Doing that results in a broken index entry in PDF output. We had only
a few like that, which is probably why nobody noticed before.
Standardize on putting the <term> first.
Josh Kupershmidt
The docs showed that early-January dates can be considered part of the
previous year for week-counting purposes, but failed to say explicitly
that late-December dates can also be considered part of the next year.
Fix that, and add a cross-reference to the "isoyear" field. Per bug
#7967 from Pawel Kobylak.
This function was misdeclared to take cstring when it should take internal.
This at least allows crashing the server, and in principle an attacker
might be able to use the function to examine the contents of server memory.
The correct fix is to adjust the system catalog contents (and fix the
regression tests that should have caught this but failed to). However,
asking users to correct the catalog contents in existing installations
is a pain, so as a band-aid fix for the back branches, install a check
in enum_recv() to make it throw error if called with a cstring argument.
We will later revert this in HEAD in favor of correcting the catalogs.
Our thanks to Sumit Soni (via Secunia SVCRP) for reporting this issue.
Security: CVE-2013-0255
My "fix" for bugs #7578 and #6116 on DROP OWNED at fe3b5eb08a not only
misstated that it applied to REASSIGN OWNED (which it did not affect),
but it also failed to fix the problems fully, because I didn't test the
case of owned shared objects. Thus I created a new bug, reported by
Thomas Kellerer as #7748, which would cause DROP OWNED to fail with a
not-for-user-consumption error message. The code would attempt to drop
the database, which not only fails to work because the underlying code
does not support that, but is a pretty dangerous and undesirable thing
to be doing as well.
This patch fixes that bug by having DROP OWNED only attempt to process
shared objects when grants on them are found, ignoring ownership.
Backpatch to 8.3, which is as far as the previous bug was backpatched.
Since 9.0, the count parameter has only limited the number of tuples
actually returned by the executor. It doesn't affect the behavior of
INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE unless RETURNING is specified, because without
RETURNING, the ModifyTable plan node doesn't return control to execMain.c
for each tuple. And we only check the limit at the top level.
While this behavioral change was unintentional at the time, discussion of
bug #6572 led us to the conclusion that we prefer the new behavior anyway,
and so we should just adjust the docs to match rather than change the code.
Accordingly, do that. Back-patch as far as 9.0 so that the docs match the
code in each branch.
If pg_extension_config_dump() is executed again for a table already listed
in the extension's extconfig, the code was blindly making a new array entry.
This does not seem useful. Fix it to replace the existing array entry
instead, so that it's possible for extension update scripts to alter the
filter conditions for configuration tables.
In addition, teach ALTER EXTENSION DROP TABLE to check for an extconfig
entry for the target table, and remove it if present. This is not a 100%
solution because it's allowed for an extension update script to just
summarily DROP a member table, and that code path doesn't go through
ExecAlterExtensionContentsStmt. We could probably make that case clean
things up if we had to, but it would involve sticking a very ugly wart
somewhere in the guts of dependency.c. Since on the whole it seems quite
unlikely that extension updates would want to remove pre-existing
configuration tables, making the case possible with an explicit command
seems sufficient.
Per bug #7756 from Regina Obe. Back-patch to 9.1 where extensions were
introduced.
Bruce Momjian