We started to use this linker switch in commit 9df308697 of
2004-07-13, which was in the OS X 10.3 era. Apparently it's been a
no-op since around OS X 10.9. Apple's most recent toolchain version
actively complains about it, so it's time to get rid of it.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/467042.1695766998@sss.pgh.pa.us
Yet another bug in the ilk of commits a7ee7c851 and 741b88435. In
741b88435, we took care to clear the memorized location of the
downlink when we split the parent page, because splitting the parent
page can move the downlink. But we missed that even *updating* a tuple
on the parent can move it, because updating a tuple on a gist page is
implemented as a delete+insert, so the updated tuple gets moved to the
end of the page.
This commit fixes the bug in two different ways (belt and suspenders):
1. Clear the downlink when we update a tuple on the parent page, even
if it's not split. This the same approach as in commits a7ee7c851
and 741b88435.
I also noticed that gistFindCorrectParent did not clear the
'downlinkoffnum' when it stepped to the right sibling. Fix that
too, as it seems like a clear bug even though I haven't been able
to find a test case to hit that.
2. Change gistFindCorrectParent so that it treats 'downlinkoffnum'
merely as a hint. It now always first checks if the downlink is
still at that location, and if not, it scans the page like before.
That's more robust if there are still more cases where we fail to
clear 'downlinkoffnum' that we haven't yet uncovered. With this,
it's no longer necessary to meticulously clear 'downlinkoffnum',
so this makes the previous fixes unnecessary, but I didn't revert
them because it still seems nice to clear it when we know that the
downlink has moved.
Also add the test case using the same test data that Alexander
posted. I tried to reduce it to a smaller test, and I also tried to
reproduce this with different test data, but I was not able to, so
let's just include what we have.
Backpatch to v12, like the previous fixes.
Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/18129-caca016eaf0c3702@postgresql.org
As implemented in 5891c7a8ed, setting "force" to true in
pgstat_report_wal() causes the routine to not wait for the pgstat
shmem lock if it cannot be acquired, in which case the WAL and I/O
statistics finish by not being flushed. The origin of the confusion
comes from pgstat_flush_wal() and pgstat_flush_io(), that use "nowait"
as sole argument. The I/O stats are new in v16.
This is the opposite behavior of what has been used in
pgstat_report_stat(), where "force" is the opposite of "nowait". In
this case, when "force" is true, the routine sets "nowait" to false,
which would cause the routine to wait for the pgstat shmem lock,
ensuring that the stats are always flushed. When "force" is false,
"nowait" is set to true, and the stats would only not be flushed if the
pgstat shmem lock can be acquired, returning immediately without
flushing the stats if the lock cannot be acquired.
This commit changes pgstat_report_wal() so as "force" has the same
behavior as in pgstat_report_stat(). There are currently three callers
of pgstat_report_wal():
- Two in the checkpointer where force=true during a shutdown and the
main checkpointer loop. Now the code behaves so as the stats are always
flushed.
- One in the main loop of the bgwriter, where force=false. Now the code
behaves so as the stats would not be flushed if the pgstat shmem lock
could not be acquired.
Before this commit, some stats on WAL and I/O could have been lost after
a shutdown, for example.
Reported-by: Ryoga Yoshida
Author: Ryoga Yoshida, Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/f87a4d7be70530606b864fd1df91718c@oss.nttdata.com
Backpatch-through: 15
bae868ca removed a check that was still needed. If you had an
xl_tot_len at the end of a page that was too small for a record header,
but not big enough to span onto the next page, we'd immediately perform
the CRC check using a bogus large length. Because of arbitrary coding
differences between the CRC implementations on different platforms,
nothing very bad happened on common modern systems. On systems using
the _sb8.c fallback we could segfault.
Restore that check, add a new assertion and supply a test for that case.
Back-patch to 12, like bae868ca.
Tested-by: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Tested-by: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA%2BhUKGLCkTT7zYjzOxuLGahBdQ%3DMcF%3Dz5ZvrjSOnW4EDhVjT-g%40mail.gmail.com
For some reason I used not_like = { pg_dumpall_dbprivs => 1, } in the test
condition of one of the tests added in in c66a7d75e6. That doesn't make sense
for two reasons: 1) not_like isn't a valid test condition 2) the database
should not be dumped in any of the tests. Due to 1), the test achieved its
goal, but clearly the formulation is confusing. Instead use like => {}, with
a comment explaining why.
Reported-by: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3ddf79f2-8b7b-a093-11d2-5c739bc64f86@eisentraut.org
Backpatch: 11-, like c66a7d75e6
Parse analysis of a CallStmt will inject mutable information,
for instance the OID of the called procedure, so that subsequent
DDL may create a need to re-parse the CALL. We failed to detect
this for CALLs in plpgsql routines, because no dependency information
was collected when putting a CallStmt into the plan cache. That
could lead to misbehavior or strange errors such as "cache lookup
failed".
Before commit ee895a655, the issue would only manifest for CALLs
appearing in atomic contexts, because we re-planned non-atomic
CALLs every time through anyway.
It is now apparent that extract_query_dependencies() probably
needs a special case for every utility statement type for which
stmt_requires_parse_analysis() returns true. I wanted to add
something like Assert(!stmt_requires_parse_analysis(...)) when
falling out of extract_query_dependencies_walker without doing
anything, but there are API issues as well as a more fundamental
point: stmt_requires_parse_analysis is supposed to be applied to
raw parser output, so it'd be cheating to assume it will give the
correct answer for post-parse-analysis trees. I contented myself
with adding a comment.
Per bug #18131 from Christian Stork. Back-patch to all supported
branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18131-576854e79c5cd264@postgresql.org
Without the added "relation" it's not immediately clear that the option
relates to the relation segment size and not e.g. the WAL segment size.
The option was added in d3b111e32.
Reported-by: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/837536.1695348498@sss.pgh.pa.us
Backpatch: 16-
The initial estimate of the number of distinct ParsedWords is just
that: an estimate. Don't let it exceed what palloc is willing to
allocate. If in fact we need more entries, we'll eventually fail
trying to enlarge the array. But if we don't, this allows success on
inputs that currently draw "invalid memory alloc request size".
Per bug #18080 from Uwe Binder. Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18080-d5c5e58fef8c99b7@postgresql.org
The --help output stated that schemas were specified using PATTERN
when they in fact aren't pattern matched but are required to be
exact matches. This changes to SCHEMA to make that clear.
Backpatch through v16 where this was introduced.
Author: Kuwamura Masaki <kuwamura@db.is.i.nagoya-u.ac.jp>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMyC8qp9mXPQd5D6s6CJxvmignsbTqGZwDDB6VYJOn1A8WG38w@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 16
When specifying multiple schemas to exclude with -N parameters, none
of the schemas are actually excluded (a single -N worked as expected).
This fixes the catalog query to handle multiple exclusions and adds a
test for this case.
Backpatch to v16 where this was introduced.
Author: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
Author: Kuwamura Masaki <kuwamura@db.is.i.nagoya-u.ac.jp>
Reported-by: Kuwamura Masaki <kuwamura@db.is.i.nagoya-u.ac.jp>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMyC8qp9mXPQd5D6s6CJxvmignsbTqGZwDDB6VYJOn1A8WG38w@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 16
Commit cda6a8d01d removed a few datatypes, but didn't update
pg_upgrade --check to throw error if these types are used. So the users
find that pg_upgrade --check tells them that everything is fine, only to
fail when the real upgrade is attempted.
Reviewed-by: Tristan Partin <tristan@neon.tech>
Reviewed-by: Suraj Kharage <suraj.kharage@enterprisedb.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/202309201654.ng4ksea25mti@alvherre.pgsql
'Q' for 64 bit integers turns out not to work on 32 bit Perl, as
revealed by the build farm. Use 'II' instead, and deal with endianness.
Back-patch to 12, like bae868ca.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/ZQ4r1vHcryBsSi_V%40paquier.xyz
xl_tot_len comes first in a WAL record. Usually we don't trust it to be
the true length until we've validated the record header. If the record
header was split across two pages, previously we wouldn't do the
validation until after we'd already tried to allocate enough memory to
hold the record, which was bad because it might actually be garbage
bytes from a recycled WAL file, so we could try to allocate a lot of
memory. Release 15 made it worse.
Since 70b4f82a4b, we'd at least generate an end-of-WAL condition if the
garbage 4 byte value happened to be > 1GB, but we'd still try to
allocate up to 1GB of memory bogusly otherwise. That was an
improvement, but unfortunately release 15 tries to allocate another
object before that, so you could get a FATAL error and recovery could
fail.
We can fix both variants of the problem more fundamentally using
pre-existing page-level validation, if we just re-order some logic.
The new order of operations in the split-header case defers all memory
allocation based on xl_tot_len until we've read the following page. At
that point we know that its first few bytes are not recycled data, by
checking its xlp_pageaddr, and that its xlp_rem_len agrees with
xl_tot_len on the preceding page. That is strong evidence that
xl_tot_len was truly the start of a record that was logged.
This problem was most likely to occur on a standby, because
walreceiver.c recycles WAL files without zeroing out trailing regions of
each page. We could fix that too, but it wouldn't protect us from rare
crash scenarios where the trailing zeroes don't make it to disk.
With reliable xl_tot_len validation in place, the ancient policy of
considering malloc failure to indicate corruption at end-of-WAL seems
quite surprising, but changing that is left for later work.
Also included is a new TAP test to exercise various cases of end-of-WAL
detection by writing contrived data into the WAL from Perl.
Back-patch to 12. We decided not to put this change into the final
release of 11.
Author: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Author: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> (the idea, not the code)
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Reviewed-by: Sergei Kornilov <sk@zsrv.org>
Reviewed-by: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17928-aa92416a70ff44a2%40postgresql.org
The previous wording had a faint archaic whiff to it, and more
importantly used "catalogs" as a verb, which while cutely
self-referential seems likely to provoke confusion in this
particular context. Also consistently use "kind" not "type" to
refer to the different kinds of relations distinguished by relkind.
Per gripe from Martin Nash. Back-patch to supported versions.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/169518739902.3727338.4793815593763320945@wrigleys.postgresql.org
Guard against the pointer being NULL before pfreeing upon an error
returned from OpenSSL. Also handle errors from X509_NAME_print_ex
which also can return -1 on memory allocation errors.
Backpatch down to v15 where the code was added.
Author: Sergey Shinderuk <s.shinderuk@postgrespro.ru>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/8db5374d-32e0-6abb-d402-40762511eff2@postgrespro.ru
Backpatch-through: v15
In older branches, COMMIT/ROLLBACK AND CHAIN failed to propagate
the current transaction's properties to the new transaction if
there was any open subtransaction (unreleased savepoint).
Instead, some previous transaction's properties would be restored.
This is because the "if (s->chain)" check in CommitTransactionCommand
examined the wrong instance of the "chain" flag and falsely
concluded that it didn't need to save transaction properties.
Our regression tests would have noticed this, except they used
identical transaction properties for multiple tests in a row,
so that the faulty behavior was not distinguishable from correct
behavior.
Commit 12d768e70 fixed the problem in v15 and later, but only rather
accidentally, because I removed the "if (s->chain)" test to avoid a
compiler warning, while not realizing that the warning was flagging a
real bug.
In v14 and before, remove the if-test and save transaction properties
unconditionally; just as in the newer branches, that's not expensive
enough to justify thinking harder.
Add the comment and extra regression test to v15 and later to
forestall any future recurrence, but there's no live bug in those
branches.
Patch by me, per bug #18118 from Liu Xiang. Back-patch to v12 where
the AND CHAIN feature was added.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18118-4b72fcbb903aace6@postgresql.org
The comment introduced by commit e7cb7ee14 was a bit too terse, which
could lead to extensions doing different things within the hook function
than we intend to allow. Extend the comment to explain what they can do
within the hook function.
Back-patch to all supported branches.
In passing, I rephrased a nearby comment that I recently added to the
back branches.
Reviewed by David Rowley and Andrei Lepikhov.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPmGK15SBPA1nr3Aqsdm%2BYyS-ay0Ayo2BRYQ8_A2To9eLqwopQ%40mail.gmail.com
ae78cae3b added the --buffer-usage-limit to vacuumdb to allow it to
include the BUFFER_USAGE_LIMIT option in the VACUUM command.
Unfortunately, that commit forgot to adjust the code so the option was
added to the ANALYZE command when the -Z command line argument was
specified.
There were no issues with the -z command as that option just adds
ANALYZE to the VACUUM command.
In passing adjust the code to escape the --buffer-usage-limit option
before passing it to the server. It seems nothing beyond a confusing
error message could become this lack of escaping as VACUUM cannot be
specified in a multi-command string.
Reported-by: Ryoga Yoshida
Author: Ryoga Yoshida, David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/08930c0b541700a5264e5fbf3a685f5a%40oss.nttdata.com
Backpatch-through: 16, where ae78cae3b was introduced.
PLy_elog() was not able to handle correctly cases where a SPI called
failed, which would fill in a DETAIL string able to trigger an
assertion. We may want to improve this infrastructure so as it is able
to provide any extra detail information provided by an error stack, but
this is left as a future improvement as it could impact existing error
stacks and any applications that depend on them. For now, the assertion
is removed and a regression test is added to cover the case of a failure
with a detail string.
This problem exists since 2bd78eb8d5, so backpatch all the way down
with tweaks to the regression tests output added where required.
Author: Alexander Lakhin
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18070-ab9c171cbf4ebb0f@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 11
cursor_to_xmlschema() assumed that any Portal must have a tupDesc,
which is not so. Add a defensive check.
It's plausible that this mistake occurred because of the rather
poorly chosen name of the lookup function SPI_cursor_find(),
which in such cases is returning something that isn't very much
like a cursor. Add some documentation to try to forestall future
errors of the same ilk.
Report and patch by Boyu Yang (docs changes by me). Back-patch
to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/dd343010-c637-434c-a8cb-418f53bda3b8.yangboyu.yby@alibaba-inc.com
expandRecordVariable() failed to adjust the parse nesting structure
correctly when recursing to inspect an outer-level Var. This could
result in assertion failures or core dumps in corner cases.
Likewise, get_name_for_var_field() failed to adjust the deparse
namespace stack correctly when recursing to inspect an outer-level
Var. In this case the likely result was a "bogus varno" error
while deparsing a view.
Per bug #18077 from Jingzhou Fu. Back-patch to all supported
branches.
Richard Guo, with some adjustments by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18077-b9db97c6e0ab45d8@postgresql.org
This reverts commit a0d87bcd9b, following a remark from Andres Frend
that the new error can be triggered with an incorrect SET TRANSACTION
SNAPSHOT command without being really helpful for the user as it uses
the internal file name.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20230914020724.hlks7vunitvtbbz4@awork3.anarazel.de
Backpatch-through: 11
Karina figured out that I (Andres) confused BufferUsage.temp_blks_written with
BufferUsage.local_blks_written in fcdda1e4b5.
Tests in core PG can't easily test this, as BufferUsage is just used for
EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, BUFFERS) and pg_stat_statements. Thus this commit adds tests
for this to pg_stat_statements.
Reported-by: Karina Litskevich <litskevichkarina@gmail.com>
Author: Karina Litskevich <litskevichkarina@gmail.com>
Author: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CACiT8ibxXA6+0amGikbeFhm8B84XdQVo6D0Qfd1pQ1s8zpsnxQ@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 16-, where fcdda1e4b5 was merged
When a snapshot file fails to be read in ImportSnapshot(), it would
issue an ERROR as "invalid snapshot identifier" when opening a stream
for it in read-only mode. This error message is reworded to be the same
as all the other messages used in this case on failure, which is useful
when debugging this area.
Thinko introduced by bb446b689b where snapshot imports have been
added. A backpatch down to 11 is done as this can improve any work
related to snapshot imports in older branches.
Author: Bharath Rupireddy
Reviewed-by: Daniel Gustafsson
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CALj2ACWmr=3KdxDkm8h7Zn1XxBoF6hdzq8WQyMn2y1OL5RYFrg@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 11
These code paths should not be reached normally, but if they are an
error with "(null)" as information for the collation provider would show
up if no locale is set, while we can assume that we are referring to
libc.
This refactors the code so as the provider is always reported even if no
locale is set. The name of the function where the error happens is
added, while on it, as it can be helpful for debugging.
Issue introduced by d87d548cd0, so backpatch down to 16.
Author: Michael Paquier, Ranier Vilela
Reviewed-by: Jeff Davis, Kyotaro Horiguchi
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/7073610042fcf97e1bea2ce08b7e0214b5e11094.camel@j-davis.com
Backpatch-through: 16
Both 50e17ad28 and 29f45e299 mistakenly tried to record a plan dependency
on a function but mistakenly inverted the OidIsValid test. This meant
that we'd record a dependency only when the function's Oid was
InvalidOid. Clearly this was meant to *not* record the dependency in
that case.
50e17ad28 made this mistake first, then in v15 29f45e299 copied the same
mistake.
Reported-by: Tom Lane
Backpatch-through: 14, where 50e17ad28 first made this mistake
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2277537.1694301772@sss.pgh.pa.us
If an out-of-memory error was thrown at an unfortunate time,
ensure_record_cache_typmod_slot_exists() could leak memory and leave
behind a global state that produced an infinite loop on the next call.
Fix by merging RecordCacheArray and RecordIdentifierArray into a single
array. With only one allocation or re-allocation, there is no
intermediate state.
Back-patch to all supported releases.
Reported-by: "James Pang (chaolpan)" <chaolpan@cisco.com>
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/PH0PR11MB519113E738814BDDA702EDADD6EFA%40PH0PR11MB5191.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
This changes 020_cancel.pl so as the test is entirely skipped on
Windows. This test was already doing nothing under WIN32, except
initializing and starting a node without using it so this shaves a few
test cycles.
Author: Yugo NAGATA
Reviewed-by: Fabien Coelho
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20230810125935.22c2922ea5250ba79358965b@sraoss.co.jp
Backpatch-through: 15
This file was missed in the previous update.
Source-Git-URL: ssh://git@git.postgresql.org/pgtranslation/messages.git
Source-Git-Hash: de944161c6153124a7bf720cb99823ff31b64bab
The new test added by commit 68a59f9e9 disables the subscription and
manually drops the associated replication slot. However, since
disabling the subsubscription doesn't wait for a walsender to release
the replication slot and exit, pg_drop_replication_slot() could
fail. Avoid failure by adding a wait for the replication slot to
become inactive.
Reported-by: Hou Zhijie, as per buildfarm
Reviewed-by: Hou Zhijie
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/OS0PR01MB571682316378379AA34854F694E9A%40OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Backpatch-through: 15
Extend the PG_TEST_EXTRA documentation to mention resource intensive
tests as well. The previous wording only mentioned special software
and security in the main paragraph, with resource usage listed on one
of the tests in the list.
Backpatch to v15 where f47ed79cc8 added wal_consistenct_checking as
a PG_TEST_EXTRA target.
Author: Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAN55FZ0OthTuBdiNkaX2BvxuHdK4Y1MVEb8_uEuD1yHMPmT9Og@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 15
pgbouncer can cause PQbackendPID() to return negative values due to it
filling be_pid with random bytes (even these days pid_max can only be
set up to 2^22 on 64b machines on Linux, for example, so this cannot
happen with normal PID numbers). When this happens, pg_basebackup may
generate a temporary slot name that may not be accepted by the parser,
leading to spurious failures, like:
pg_basebackup: error: could not send replication command
ERROR: replication slot name "pg_basebackup_-1201966863" contains
invalid character
This commit fixes that problem by formatting the result from
PQbackendPID() as an unsigned integer when creating the temporary
replication slot name, so as the invalid character is gone and the
command can be parsed.
Author: Jelte Fennema
Reviewed-by: Daniel Gustafsson, Nishant Sharma
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAGECzQQOGvYfp8ziF4fWQ_o8s2K7ppaoWBQnTmdakn3s-4Z=5g@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 11
This test fails due to known bugs in the test and the server. Those
will be fixed in master shortly and possibly back-patched a bit later,
but in the meantime it is unhelpful for package maintainers if the tests
randomly fail, and it's not a good time to make complex changes in 16.
This had already been done for older branches prior to 15's release.
Now we're about to release 16, and Debian's test builds are regularly
failing on one architecture, so let's do the same for 15 and 16.
Reported-by: Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>
Reported-by: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CALj2ACVr8au2J_9D88UfRCi0JdWhyQDDxAcSVav0B0irx9nXEg%40mail.gmail.com
Tom Lane