Don't move parenthesized lines to the left, even if that means they
flow past the right margin.
By default, BSD indent lines up statement continuation lines that are
within parentheses so that they start just to the right of the preceding
left parenthesis. However, traditionally, if that resulted in the
continuation line extending to the right of the desired right margin,
then indent would push it left just far enough to not overrun the margin,
if it could do so without making the continuation line start to the left of
the current statement indent. That makes for a weird mix of indentations
unless one has been completely rigid about never violating the 80-column
limit.
This behavior has been pretty universally panned by Postgres developers.
Hence, disable it with indent's new -lpl switch, so that parenthesized
lines are always lined up with the preceding left paren.
This patch is much less interesting than the first round of indent
changes, but also bulkier, so I thought it best to separate the effects.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1dAmxK-0006EE-1r@gemulon.postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/30527.1495162840@sss.pgh.pa.us
Change pg_bsd_indent to follow upstream rules for placement of comments
to the right of code, and remove pgindent hack that caused comments
following #endif to not obey the general rule.
Commit e3860ffa4d wasn't actually using
the published version of pg_bsd_indent, but a hacked-up version that
tried to minimize the amount of movement of comments to the right of
code. The situation of interest is where such a comment has to be
moved to the right of its default placement at column 33 because there's
code there. BSD indent has always moved right in units of tab stops
in such cases --- but in the previous incarnation, indent was working
in 8-space tab stops, while now it knows we use 4-space tabs. So the
net result is that in about half the cases, such comments are placed
one tab stop left of before. This is better all around: it leaves
more room on the line for comment text, and it means that in such
cases the comment uniformly starts at the next 4-space tab stop after
the code, rather than sometimes one and sometimes two tabs after.
Also, ensure that comments following #endif are indented the same
as comments following other preprocessor commands such as #else.
That inconsistency turns out to have been self-inflicted damage
from a poorly-thought-through post-indent "fixup" in pgindent.
This patch is much less interesting than the first round of indent
changes, but also bulkier, so I thought it best to separate the effects.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1dAmxK-0006EE-1r@gemulon.postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/30527.1495162840@sss.pgh.pa.us
Previously the changes to the "data" part of the sequence, i.e. the
one containing the current value, were not transactional, whereas the
definition, including minimum and maximum value were. That leads to
odd behaviour if a schema change is rolled back, with the potential
that out-of-bound sequence values can be returned.
To avoid the issue create a new relfilenode fork whenever ALTER
SEQUENCE is executed, similar to how TRUNCATE ... RESTART IDENTITY
already is already handled.
This commit also makes ALTER SEQUENCE RESTART transactional, as it
seems to be too confusing to have some forms of ALTER SEQUENCE behave
transactionally, some forms not. This way setval() and nextval() are
not transactional, but DDL is, which seems to make sense.
This commit also rolls back parts of the changes made in 3d092fe540
and f8dc1985f as they're now not needed anymore.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170522154227.nvafbsm62sjpbxvd@alap3.anarazel.de
Backpatch: Bug is in master/v10 only
In 1753b1b027, the pg_sequence system
catalog was introduced. This made sequence metadata changes
transactional, while the actual sequence values are still behaving
nontransactionally. This requires some refinement in how ALTER
SEQUENCE, which operates on both, locks the sequence and the catalog.
The main problems were:
- Concurrent ALTER SEQUENCE causes "tuple concurrently updated" error,
caused by updates to pg_sequence catalog.
- Sequence WAL writes and catalog updates are not protected by same
lock, which could lead to inconsistent recovery order.
- nextval() disregarding uncommitted ALTER SEQUENCE changes.
To fix, nextval() and friends now lock the sequence using
RowExclusiveLock instead of AccessShareLock. ALTER SEQUENCE locks the
sequence using ShareRowExclusiveLock. This means that nextval() and
ALTER SEQUENCE block each other, and ALTER SEQUENCE on the same sequence
blocks itself. (This was already the case previously for the OWNER TO,
RENAME, and SET SCHEMA variants.) Also, rearrange some code so that the
entire AlterSequence is protected by the lock on the sequence.
As an exception, use reduced locking for ALTER SEQUENCE ... RESTART.
Since that is basically a setval(), it does not require the full locking
of other ALTER SEQUENCE actions. So check whether we are only running a
RESTART and run with less locking if so.
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Jason Petersen <jason@citusdata.com>
Reported-by: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Commit 4deb41381 modified isolationtester's query to see whether a
session is blocked to also check for waits occurring in GetSafeSnapshot.
However, it did that in a way that enormously increased the query's
runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS, causing the buildfarm members
that use that to run about four times slower than before, and in some
cases fail entirely. To fix, push the entire logic into a dedicated
backend function. This should actually reduce the CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS
runtime from what it was previously, though I've not checked that.
In passing, expose a SQL function to check for safe-snapshot blockage,
comparable to pg_blocking_pids. This is more or less free given the
infrastructure built to solve the other problem, so we might as well.
Thomas Munro
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170407165749.pstcakbc637opkax@alap3.anarazel.de
This improves code coverage and lays a foundation for testing
similar issues in a distributed environment.
Author: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Concurrent auto-analyze could be holding a snapshot, affecting the
removal of deleted row versions. Remove the deletion to avoid this
happening. Per buildfarm.
In passing, make the test independent of assumptions of physical row
order, just out of sheer paranoia.
presence of page pins, which leads to serious estimation errors in the
planner. This particularly affects small heavily-accessed tables,
especially where locking (e.g. from FK constraints) forces frequent
vacuums for mxid cleanup.
Fix by keeping separate track of pages whose live tuples were actually
counted vs. pages that were only scanned for freezing purposes. Thus,
reltuples can only be set to 0 if all pages of the relation were
actually counted.
Backpatch to all supported versions.
Per bug #14057 from Nicolas Baccelli, analyzed by me.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20160331103739.8956.94469@wrigleys.postgresql.org
Previously if a directory had both isolationtester and plain
regression tests, they couldn't be run in parallel, because they'd
access the same files/directories. That, so far, only affected
contrib/test_decoding.
Rather than fix that locally in contrib/test_decoding, improve
pg_regress_isolation_[install]check to use separate resources from
plain regression tests.
That requires a minor change in pg_regress, namely that the
--outputdir is created if not already existing, that seems like good
idea anyway.
Use the improved helpers even where previously not used.
Author: Tom Lane and Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170311194831.vm5ikpczq52c2drg@alap3.anarazel.de
c.h #includes a number of core libc header files, such as <stdio.h>.
There's no point in re-including these after having read postgres.h,
postgres_fe.h, or c.h; so remove code that did so.
While at it, also fix some places that were ignoring our standard pattern
of "include postgres[_fe].h, then system header files, then other Postgres
header files". While there's not any great magic in doing it that way
rather than system headers last, it's silly to have just a few files
deviating from the general pattern. (But I didn't attempt to enforce this
globally, only in files I was touching anyway.)
I'd be the first to say that this is mostly compulsive neatnik-ism,
but over time it might save enough compile cycles to be useful.
A transaction that conflicts against itself, for example
INSERT INTO t(pk) VALUES (1),(1) ON CONFLICT DO NOTHING;
should behave the same regardless of isolation level. It certainly
shouldn't throw a serialization error, as retrying will not help.
We got this wrong due to the ON CONFLICT logic not considering the case,
as reported by Jason Dusek.
Core of this patch is by Peter Geoghegan (based on an earlier patch by
Thomas Munro), though I didn't take his proposed code refactoring for fear
that it might have unexpected side-effects. Test cases by Thomas Munro
and myself.
Report: <CAO3NbwOycQjt2Oqy2VW-eLTq2M5uGMyHnGm=RNga4mjqcYD7gQ@mail.gmail.com>
Related-Discussion: <57EE93C8.8080504@postgrespro.ru>
ExecInitCteScan supposed that it didn't have to do anything to the extra
tuplestore read pointer it gets from tuplestore_alloc_read_pointer.
However, it needs this read pointer to be positioned at the start of the
tuplestore, while tuplestore_alloc_read_pointer is actually defined as
cloning the current position of read pointer 0. In normal situations
that accidentally works because we initialize the whole plan tree at once,
before anything gets read. But it fails in an EvalPlanQual recheck, as
illustrated in bug #14328 from Dima Pavlov. To fix, just forcibly rewind
the pointer after tuplestore_alloc_read_pointer. The cost of doing so is
negligible unless the tuplestore is already in TSS_READFILE state, which
wouldn't happen in normal cases. We could consider altering tuplestore's
API to make that case cheaper, but that would make for a more invasive
back-patch and it doesn't seem worth it.
This has been broken probably for as long as we've had CTEs, so back-patch
to all supported branches.
Discussion: <32468.1474548308@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Where possible, use palloc or pg_malloc instead; otherwise, insert
explicit NULL checks.
Generally speaking, these are places where an actual OOM is quite
unlikely, either because they're in client programs that don't
allocate all that much, or they're very early in process startup
so that we'd likely have had a fork() failure instead. Hence,
no back-patch, even though this is nominally a bug fix.
Michael Paquier, with some adjustments by me
Discussion: <CAB7nPqRu07Ot6iht9i9KRfYLpDaF2ZuUv5y_+72uP23ZAGysRg@mail.gmail.com>
On some buildfarm animals the isolationtest added in 07ef0351 failed, as
the order in which processes are run after unlocking is not
guaranteed. Add an alternative output for that.
Discussion: <7969.1471484738@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Backpatch: 9.6, like the test in the aforementioned commit
INSERT .. ON CONFLICT runs a pre-check of the possible conflicting
constraints before performing the actual speculative insertion. In case
the inserted tuple included TOASTed columns the ON CONFLICT condition
would be handled correctly in case the conflict was caught by the
pre-check, but if two transactions entered the speculative insertion
phase at the same time, one would have to re-try, and the code for
aborting a speculative insertion did not handle deleting the
speculatively inserted TOAST datums correctly.
TOAST deletion would fail with "ERROR: attempted to delete invisible
tuple" as we attempted to remove the TOAST tuples using
simple_heap_delete which reasoned that the given tuples should not be
visible to the command that wrote them.
This commit updates the heap_abort_speculative() function which aborts
the conflicting tuple to use itself, via toast_delete, for deleting
associated TOAST datums. Like before, the inserted toast rows are not
marked as being speculative.
This commit also adds a isolationtester spec test, exercising the
relevant code path. Unfortunately 9.5 cannot handle two waiting
sessions, and thus cannot execute this test.
Reported-By: Viren Negi, Oskari Saarenmaa
Author: Oskari Saarenmaa, edited a bit by me
Bug: #14150
Discussion: <20160519123338.12513.20271@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
Backpatch: 9.5, where ON CONFLICT was introduced
To ensure that "make installcheck" can be used safely against an existing
installation, we need to be careful about what global object names
(database, role, and tablespace names) we use; otherwise we might
accidentally clobber important objects. There's been a weak consensus that
test databases should have names including "regression", and that test role
names should start with "regress_", but we didn't have any particular rule
about tablespace names; and neither of the other rules was followed with
any consistency either.
This commit moves us a long way towards having a hard-and-fast rule that
regression test databases must have names including "regression", and that
test role and tablespace names must start with "regress_". It's not
completely there because I did not touch some test cases in rolenames.sql
that test creation of special role names like "session_user". That will
require some rethinking of exactly what we want to test, whereas the intent
of this patch is just to hit all the cases in which the needed renamings
are cosmetic.
There is no enforcement mechanism in this patch either, but if we don't
add one we can expect that the tests will soon be violating the convention
again. Again, that's not such a cosmetic change and it will require
discussion. (But I did use a quick-hack enforcement patch to find these
cases.)
Discussion: <16638.1468620817@sss.pgh.pa.us>
When key-share locking a tuple that has been not-key-updated, and the
update is a committed transaction, in some cases we raised
serializability errors:
ERROR: could not serialize access due to concurrent update
Because the key-share doesn't conflict with the update, the error is
unnecessary and inconsistent with the case that the update hasn't
committed yet. This causes problems for some usage patterns, even if it
can be claimed that it's sufficient to retry the aborted transaction:
given a steady stream of updating transactions and a long locking
transaction, the long transaction can be starved indefinitely despite
multiple retries.
To fix, we recognize that HeapTupleSatisfiesUpdate can return
HeapTupleUpdated when an updating transaction has committed, and that we
need to deal with that case exactly as if it were a non-committed
update: verify whether the two operations conflict, and if not, carry on
normally. If they do conflict, however, there is a difference: in the
HeapTupleBeingUpdated case we can just sleep until the concurrent
transaction is gone, while in the HeapTupleUpdated case this is not
possible and we must raise an error instead.
Per trouble report from Olivier Dony.
In addition to a couple of test cases that verify the changed behavior,
I added a test case to verify the behavior that remains unchanged,
namely that errors are raised when a update that modifies the key is
used. That must still generate serializability errors. One
pre-existing test case changes behavior; per discussion, the new
behavior is actually the desired one.
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/560AA479.4080807@odoo.comhttps://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20151014164844.3019.25750@wrigleys.postgresql.org
Backpatch to 9.3, where the problem appeared.
The previous coding here was formally undefined, though it seems to
accidentally work on most platforms in the buildfarm. Caught by some
OpenBSD platforms in which libc contains an assertion check for
overlapping areas passed to memcpy().
Thomas Munro
While prior to this patch the user-visible effect on the database
of any set of successfully committed serializable transactions was
always consistent with some one-at-a-time order of execution of
those transactions, the presence of declarative constraints could
allow errors to occur which were not possible in any such ordering,
and developers had no good workarounds to prevent user-facing
errors where they were not necessary or desired. This patch adds
a check for serialization failure ahead of duplicate key checking
so that if a developer explicitly (redundantly) checks for the
pre-existing value they will get the desired serialization failure
where the problem is caused by a concurrent serializable
transaction; otherwise they will get a duplicate key error.
While it would be better if the reads performed by the constraints
could count as part of the work of the transaction for
serialization failure checking, and we will hopefully get there
some day, this patch allows a clean and reliable way for developers
to work around the issue. In many cases existing code will already
be doing the right thing for this to "just work".
Author: Thomas Munro, with minor editing of docs by me
Reviewed-by: Marko Tiikkaja, Kevin Grittner
In commit afb9249d06, we (probably I) made ExecLockRows assign
null test tuples to all relations of the query while setting up to do an
EvalPlanQual recheck for a newly-updated locked row. This was sheerest
brain fade: we should only set test tuples for relations that are lockable
by the LockRows node, and in particular empty test tuples are only sensible
for inheritance child relations that weren't the source of the current
tuple from their inheritance tree. Setting a null test tuple for an
unrelated table causes it to return NULLs when it should not, as exhibited
in bug #14034 from Bronislav Houdek. To add insult to injury, doing it the
wrong way required two loops where one would suffice; so the corrected code
is even a bit shorter and faster.
Add a regression test case based on his example, and back-patch to 9.5
where the bug was introduced.
I noticed that the async-notify test results in log messages like these:
LOG: could not send data to client: Broken pipe
FATAL: connection to client lost
This is because it unceremoniously disconnects a client session that is
about to have some NOTIFY messages delivered to it. Such log messages
during a regression test might well cause people to go looking for a
problem that doesn't really exist (it did cause me to waste some time that
way). We can shut it up by adding an UNLISTEN command to session teardown.
Patch HEAD only; this doesn't seem significant enough to back-patch.
The original coding of the test was relying too much on the ordering in
which backends are awakened once an advisory lock which they wait for is
released. Change the code so that each backend uses its own advisory
lock instead, so that the output becomes stable. Also add a few seconds
of sleep between lock releases, so that the test isn't broken in
overloaded buildfarm animals, as suggested by Tom Lane.
Per buildfarm members spoonbill and guaibasaurus.
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/19294.1456551587%40sss.pgh.pa.us
In 0e5680f473, I fixed a bug in heapam that caused spurious deadlocks
when multiple updates concurrently attempted to modify the old version
of an updated tuple whose new version was key-share locked. I proposed
an isolationtester spec file that reproduced the bug, but back then
isolationtester wasn't mature enough to be able to run it. Now that
38f8bdcac4 is in the tree, we can have this spec file too.
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20141212205254.GC1768%40alvh.no-ip.org
This patch introduces "pg_blocking_pids(int) returns int[]", which returns
the PIDs of any sessions that are blocking the session with the given PID.
Historically people have obtained such information using a self-join on
the pg_locks view, but it's unreasonably tedious to do it that way with any
modicum of correctness, and the addition of parallel queries has pretty
much broken that approach altogether. (Given some more columns in the view
than there are today, you could imagine handling parallel-query cases with
a 4-way join; but ugh.)
The new function has the following behaviors that are painful or impossible
to get right via pg_locks:
1. Correctly understands which lock modes block which other ones.
2. In soft-block situations (two processes both waiting for conflicting lock
modes), only the one that's in front in the wait queue is reported to
block the other.
3. In parallel-query cases, reports all sessions blocking any member of
the given PID's lock group, and reports a session by naming its leader
process's PID, which will be the pg_backend_pid() value visible to
clients.
The motivation for doing this right now is mostly to fix the isolation
tests. Commit 38f8bdcac4 lobotomized
isolationtester's is-it-waiting query by removing its ability to recognize
nonconflicting lock modes, as a crude workaround for the inability to
handle soft-block situations properly. But even without the lock mode
tests, the old query was excessively slow, particularly in
CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS builds; some of our buildfarm animals fail the new
deadlock-hard test because the deadlock timeout elapses before they can
probe the waiting status of all eight sessions. Replacing the pg_locks
self-join with use of pg_blocking_pids() is not only much more correct, but
a lot faster: I measure it at about 9X faster in a typical dev build with
Asserts, and 3X faster in CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS builds. That should provide
enough headroom for the slower CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS animals to pass the
test, without having to lengthen deadlock_timeout yet more and thus slow
down the test for everyone else.
The previous value of 5s is inadequate for the buildfarm's
CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS animals: they take long enough to do the is-it-waiting
queries that the timeout expires, allowing the database state to change,
before isolationtester is done looking. Perhaps 10s will be enough.
(If it isn't, I'm inclined to reduce the number of sessions involved.)
This mostly reverts commit 9c9782f066.
I left in the parts that rearranged removal of completed waiting steps;
but the idea of not rechecking a step's blocked-ness isn't working.
It turns out that there is a second race condition in the new deadlock-hard
test: once the deadlock detector fires, it's uncertain whether step s7a8 or
step s8a1 will report first, because killing s8's transaction unblocks s7.
So far, s7 has only been seen to report first in CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS
builds, but it's pretty reproducible there, and in theory it should
sometimes occur in normal builds too. If s7 were a bit slower than usual,
that could also break the test, since the existing expected-file assumes
that we'll see s7a8 report the first time we check it after s8a1 completes.
To fix, add a post-lock delay to s7a8.
If we're retrying a step, then we already decided it was blocked on a lock,
and there's no need to recheck that. The original coding of commit
38f8bdcac4 resulted in a large number of
is-it-waiting queries when dealing with multiple concurrently-blocked
sessions, which is fairly pointless and also results in test failures in
CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS builds, where the is-it-waiting query is quite slow.
This definition also permits appending pg_sleep() calls to steps where it's
needed to control the order of finish of concurrent steps. Before, that
did not work nicely because we'd decide that a step performing a sleep was
not blocked and hang up waiting for it to finish, rather than noticing the
completion of the concurrent step we're supposed to notice first.
In passing, revise handling of removal of completed waiting steps
to make it a bit less messy.
The new deadlock-soft-2 test has a timing dependency too: it supposes
that isolationtester will detect step s1b as waiting before the deadlock
detector runs and grants it the lock. Adjust deadlock_timeout to ensure
that that's true even in CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS builds, where the wait
detection query is quite slow. Per buildfarm member jaguarundi.
The original formulation of 4c9864b9b4
was extremely timing-sensitive, because it arranged for the deadlock
detector to be running (and possibly unblocking the current query)
at almost exactly the same time as isolationtester would be probing
to see if the query is blocked. The committed expected-file assumed
that the deadlock detection would finish first, but we see the opposite
on both fast and slow buildfarm animals. Adjust the deadlock timeout
settings to make it predictable that isolationtester *will* see the
query as waiting before deadlock detection unblocks it.
I used a 5s timeout for the same reasons mentioned in
a7921f71a3.
Fix a few oversights in 38f8bdcac4982215beb9f65a19debecaf22fd470:
don't leak memory in run_permutation(), remember when we've issued
a cancel rather than issuing another one every 10ms,
fix some typos in comments.
This allows testing of deadlock scenarios. Scenarios that would
previously have been considered invalid are now simply taken as a
scenario in which more than one backend will wait.
This is a necessary prerequisite for forthcoming changes to allow deadlock
scenarios to be tested by the isolation tester. It is also a good idea on
general principle, since these scenarios add no useful test coverage not
provided by other scenarios, but do to take time to execute.
Commit 2834855cb added a not-very-carefully-thought-out isolation test
to check a BRIN index bug fix. The test depended on the availability
of the pageinspect contrib module, which meant it did not work in
several common testing scenarios such as "make check-world". It's not
clear whether we want a core test depending on a contrib module like
that, but in any case, failing to deal with the possibility that the
module isn't present in the installation-under-test is not acceptable.
Remove that test pending some better solution.
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.
A Salesforce colleague of mine griped that the regression tests don't
exercise EvalPlanQualFetchRowMarks() and allied routines. Which is
a fair complaint. Add test cases that go through the REFERENCE and COPY
code paths. Unfortunately we don't have sufficient infrastructure right
now to exercise the FDW code path in the isolation tests, but this is
surely better than before.
Tom Lane