Commit 85e5e222b1 turns out not to have taken
care of all cases of the partially-evaluatable-PlaceHolderVar problem found
by Andreas Seltenreich's fuzz testing. I had set it up to check for risky
PHVs only in the event that we were making a star-schema-based exception to
the param_source_rels join ordering heuristic. However, it turns out that
the problem can occur even in joins that satisfy the param_source_rels
heuristic, in which case allow_star_schema_join() isn't consulted.
Refactor so that we check for risky PHVs whenever the proposed join has
any remaining parameterization.
Back-patch to 9.2, like the previous patch (except for the regression test
case, which only works back to 9.3 because it uses LATERAL).
Note that this discovery implies that problems of this sort could've
occurred in 9.2 and up even before the star-schema patch; though I've not
tried to prove that experimentally.
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.
XLogRecPtr was compared with InvalidTransactionId instead of
InvalidXLogRecPtr. As both are defined to the same value this doesn't
cause any actual problems, but it's still wrong.
Backpatch: 9.4-master, bug was introduced in 9.4
Immediately starting to stream after --create-slot is inconvenient in a
number of situations (e.g. when configuring a slot for use in
recovery.conf) and it's easy to just call pg_receivexlog twice in the
rest of the cases.
Author: Michael Paquier
Discussion: CAB7nPqQ9qEtuDiKY3OpNzHcz5iUA+DUX9FcN9K8GUkCZvG7+Ew@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 9.5, where the option was introduced
The allowed syntax for OVERLAPS, viz "row OVERLAPS row", is sufficiently
constrained that we don't actually need a precedence declaration for
OVERLAPS; indeed removing this declaration does not change the generated
gram.c file at all. Let's remove it to avoid confusion about whether
OVERLAPS has precedence or not. If we ever generalize what we allow for
OVERLAPS, we might need to put back a precedence declaration for it,
but we might want some other level than what it has today --- and leaving
the declaration there would just risk confusion about whether that would
be an incompatible change.
Likewise, remove OVERLAPS from the documentation's precedence table.
Per discussion with Noah Misch. Back-patch to 9.5 where we hacked up some
nearby precedence decisions.
commit 9043Fe390f4f0b4586cfe59cbd22314b9c3e2957 broke multibyte
regression tests because the commit removes the warning message when
temporary hash indexes is created, which has been added by commit
07af523870.
Back patched to 9.5 stable tree.
A new test case from Andreas Seltenreich showed that we were still a bit
confused about removing PlaceHolderVars during join removal. Specifically,
remove_rel_from_query would remove a PHV that was used only underneath
the removable join, even if the place where it's used was the join partner
relation and not the join clause being deleted. This would lead to a
"too late to create a new PlaceHolderInfo" error later on. We can defend
against that by checking ph_eval_at to see if the PHV could possibly be
getting used at some partner rel.
Also improve some nearby LATERAL-related logic. I decided that the check
on ph_lateral needed to take precedence over the check on ph_needed, in
case there's a lateral reference underneath the join being considered.
(That may be impossible, but I'm not convinced of it, and it's easy enough
to defend against the case.) Also, I realized that remove_rel_from_query's
logic for updating LateralJoinInfos is dead code, because we don't build
those at all until after join removal.
Back-patch to 9.3. Previous versions didn't have the LATERAL issues, of
course, and they also didn't attempt to remove PlaceHolderInfos during join
removal. (I'm starting to wonder if changing that was really such a great
idea.)
Amit reviewed the replication origins patch and made some good
points. Address them. This fixes typos in error messages, docs and
comments and adds a missing error check (although in a
should-never-happen scenario).
Discussion: CAA4eK1JqUBVeWWKwUmBPryFaje4190ug0y-OAUHWQ6tD83V4xg@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 9.5, where replication origins were introduced.
Commit 9e7e29c75a introduced an Assert that
join removal didn't reduce the eval_at set of any PlaceHolderVar to empty.
At first glance it looks like join_is_removable ensures that's true --- but
actually, the loop in join_is_removable skips PlaceHolderVars that are not
referenced above the join due to be removed. So, if we don't want any
empty eval_at sets, the right thing to do is to delete any now-unreferenced
PlaceHolderVars from the data structure entirely.
Per fuzz testing by Andreas Seltenreich. Back-patch to 9.3 where the
aforesaid Assert was added.
Formerly, this function would always return "true" for an appendrel child
relation, because it would think that the appendrel parent was a potential
join target for the child. In principle that should only lead to some
inefficiency in planning, but fuzz testing by Andreas Seltenreich disclosed
that it could lead to "could not find pathkey item to sort" planner errors
in odd corner cases. Specifically, we would think that all columns of a
child table's multicolumn index were interesting pathkeys, causing us to
generate a MergeAppend path that sorts by all the columns. However, if any
of those columns weren't actually used above the level of the appendrel,
they would not get added to that rel's targetlist, which would result in
being unable to resolve the MergeAppend's sort keys against its targetlist
during createplan.c.
Backpatch to 9.3. In older versions, columns of an appendrel get added
to its targetlist even if they're not mentioned above the scan level,
so that the failure doesn't occur. It might be worth back-patching this
fix to older versions anyway, but I'll refrain for the moment.
Further testing revealed that commit f69b4b9495 was still a few
bricks shy of a load: minor tweaking of the previous test cases resulted
in the same wrong-outer-join-order problem coming back. After study
I concluded that my previous changes in make_outerjoininfo() were just
accidentally masking the problem, and should be reverted in favor of
forcing syntactic join order whenever an upper outer join's predicate
doesn't mention a lower outer join's LHS. This still allows the
chained-outer-joins style that is the normally optimizable case.
I also tightened things up some more in join_is_legal(). It seems to me
on review that what's really happening in the exception case where we
ignore a mismatched special join is that we're allowing the proposed join
to associate into the RHS of the outer join we're comparing it to. As
such, we should *always* insist that the proposed join be a left join,
which eliminates a bunch of rather dubious argumentation. The case where
we weren't enforcing that was the one that was already known buggy anyway
(it had a violatable Assert before the aforesaid commit) so it hardly
deserves a lot of deference.
Back-patch to all active branches, like the previous patch. The added
regression test case failed in all branches back to 9.1, and I think it's
only an unrelated change in costing calculations that kept 9.0 from
choosing a broken plan.
If some, but not all, of the length word has already been read, and the
next attempt to read sees exactly the number of bytes needed to complete
the length word, or fewer, then we'll incorrectly read less than all of
the available data.
Antonin Houska
Commit e5550d5fec added some new
tests for ALTER TABLE which involved table scans. When
default_transaction_isolation = 'serializable' these acquire
relation-level SIReadLocks. The test results didn't cope with
that. Add SIReadLock as the minimum lock level for purposes of
these tests.
This could also be fixed by excluding this type of lock from the
my_locks view, but it would be a bug for SIReadLock to show up for
a relation which was not otherwise locked, so do it this way to
allow that sort of condition to cause a regression test failure.
There is some question whether we could avoid taking SIReadLocks
during these operations, but confirming the safety of that and
figuring out how to avoid the locks is not trivial, and would be
a separate patch.
Backpatch to 9.4 where the new tests were added.
pg_resetxlog.h contained two superfluous includes, origin.h superfluously
depended on logical.h, and pg_xlogdump's rmgrdesc.h only indirectly
included origin.h.
Backpatch: 9.5, where replication origins were introduced.
A few of the discrepancies had semantic significance, but I did not
track down the resulting user-visible bugs, if any. Back-patch to 9.5,
where all but one discrepancy appeared. The _equalCreateEventTrigStmt()
situation dates to 9.3 but does not affect semantics.
catversion bump due to readfuncs.c field order changes.
Commit 0ffc201a51 included this object
unconditionally. Being unprepared for that, most external, single-file
modules failed to build. This better aligns the GNU make build system
with the heuristic in the MSVC build's Project::AddDirResourceFile().
In-tree, installed modules set PGFILEDESC, so they will see no change.
Also, under PGXS, omit the nonfunctioning rule to build win32ver.rc.
Back-patch to 9.5, where the aforementioned commit first appeared.
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
I appear to accidentally have switched the comments for
pg_atomic_write_u32 and pg_atomic_read_u32 around. Also fix some minor
typos I found while fixing.
Noticed-By: Amit Kapila
Backpatch: 9.5
Per discussion, it really ought to do this. The original choice to
exclude shell types was probably made in the dark ages before we made
it harder to accidentally create shell types; but that was in 7.3.
Also, cause the standard regression tests to leave a shell type behind,
for convenience in testing the case in pg_dump and pg_upgrade.
Back-patch to all supported branches.
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.
pg_xlog is often a symlink, typically to a different filesystem. Don't
get confused and comlain about by that, and just always pretend that it's a
normal directory, even if it's really a symlink.
Also add a test case for this.
Backpatch to 9.5.
Since commit 01f6bb4b2, TestLib.pm has exported path to tmp_check directory,
so let's use that also for the pg_rewind test clusters etc.
Also, in master, the $tempdir_short variable has not been used since commit
13d856e17, which moved the initdb-running code to TestLib.pm.
Backpatch to 9.5.
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.
An EAN beginning with 979 (but not 9790 - those are ISMN's) are accepted
as ISBN numbers, but they cannot be represented in the old, 10-digit ISBN
format. They must be output in the new 13-digit ISBN-13 format. We printed
out an incorrect value for those.
Also add a regression test, to test this and some other basic functionality
of the module.
Patch by Fabien Coelho. This fixes bug #13442, reported by B.Z. Backpatch
to 9.1, where we started to recognize ISBN-13 numbers.
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.
Tom Lane