| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Statistics defined by the CREATE STATISTICS command are only used to
assist with the selectivity estimations of base relations, never for
joins. Here we mention this fact in the notes section of the CREATE
STATISTICS command.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvrMuVgDOrmg_EtFDZ=AOovq6EsJNnHH1ddyZ8EqL4yzMw@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 11
|
|
The existing errhint message and docs were missing the fact that we can't
disassociate from the slot unless the subscription is disabled.
Author: Robert Sjöblom, Peter Smith
Reviewed-by: Peter Eisentraut, Amit Kapila
Backpatch-through: 11
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/807bdf85-61ea-88e2-5712-6d9fcd4eabff@fortnox.se
|
|
In the documentation, previously the example command for
ALTER FOREIGN TABLE ... OPTIONS incorrectly included both
the option name and value with the DROP operation.
The correct syntax for the DROP operation requires only
the name of the option to be specified. This commit fixes
the example by removing the option value from the DROP operation.
Back-patch to all supported versions.
Author: Mehmet Emin KARAKAS <emin100@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Fujii Masao
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CANQrdXAHzbcEYhjGoe5A42OmfvdQhHFJzyKj9gJvHuDKyOF5Ng@mail.gmail.com
|
|
Hash partitioning on an enum is problematic because the hash codes are
derived from the OIDs assigned to the enum values, which will almost
certainly be different after a dump-and-reload than they were before.
This means that some rows probably end up in different partitions than
before, causing restore to fail because of partition constraint
violations. (pg_upgrade dodges this problem by using hacks to force
the enum values to keep the same OIDs, but that's not possible nor
desirable for pg_dump.)
Users can work around that by specifying --load-via-partition-root,
but since that's a dump-time not restore-time decision, one might
find out the need for it far too late. Instead, teach pg_dump to
apply that option automatically when dealing with a partitioned
table that has hash-on-enum partitioning.
Also deal with a pre-existing issue for --load-via-partition-root
mode: in a parallel restore, we try to TRUNCATE target tables just
before loading them, in order to enable some backend optimizations.
This is bad when using --load-via-partition-root because (a) we're
likely to suffer deadlocks from restore jobs trying to restore rows
into other partitions than they came from, and (b) if we miss getting
a deadlock we might still lose data due to a TRUNCATE removing rows
from some already-completed restore job.
The fix for this is conceptually simple: just don't TRUNCATE if we're
dealing with a --load-via-partition-root case. The tricky bit is for
pg_restore to identify those cases. In dumps using COPY commands we
can inspect each COPY command to see if it targets the nominal target
table or some ancestor. However, in dumps using INSERT commands it's
pretty impractical to examine the INSERTs in advance. To provide a
solution for that going forward, modify pg_dump to mark TABLE DATA
items that are using --load-via-partition-root with a comment.
(This change also responds to a complaint from Robert Haas that
the dump output for --load-via-partition-root is pretty confusing.)
pg_restore checks for the special comment as well as checking the
COPY command if present. This will fail to identify the combination
of --load-via-partition-root and --inserts in pre-existing dump files,
but that should be a pretty rare case in the field. If it does
happen you will probably get a deadlock failure that you can work
around by not using parallel restore, which is the same as before
this bug fix.
Having done this, there seems no remaining reason for the alarmism
in the pg_dump man page about combining --load-via-partition-root
with parallel restore, so remove that warning.
Patch by me; thanks to Julien Rouhaud for review. Back-patch to
v11 where hash partitioning was introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1376149.1675268279@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
|
Breaking <phrase> over two lines is not handled by psql's
create_help.pl. (It creates faulty \help output.)
Undo the formatting change introduced by
9bdad1b5153e5d6b77a8f9c6e32286d6bafcd76d to fix this for now.
|
|
This was only mentioned in the description of the text/label, which
are marked as being in quotes in the synopsis, which can cause
confusion (as witnessed on IRC).
Also separate the literal and NULL cases in the parameter list, per
suggestion from Tom Lane.
Also add an example of dropping a security label.
Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker, with some tweaks by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87sffqk4zp.fsf@wibble.ilmari.org
|
|
In user-manag.sgml, document precisely what privileges are conveyed
by CREATEROLE. Make particular note of the fact that it allows
changing passwords and granting access to high-privilege roles.
Also remove the suggestion of using a user with CREATEROLE and
CREATEDB instead of a superuser, as there is no real security
advantage to this approach.
Elsewhere in the documentation, adjust text that suggests that
<literal>CREATEROLE</literal> only allows for role creation, and
refer to the documentation in user-manag.sgml as appropriate.
Patch by me, reviewed by Álvaro Herrera
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZBsPL8nPhvYecx7iGo5qpDRqa9k_AcaW1SbOjugAY1Ag@mail.gmail.com
|
|
While on it, newlines are removed from the end of two elog() strings.
The others are simple grammar mistakes. One comment in pg_upgrade
referred incorrectly to sequences since a7e5457.
Author: Justin Pryzby
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20221230231257.GI1153@telsasoft.com
Backpatch-through: 11
|
|
This doc patch (master hash 66bc9d2d3e) was decided to be too
significant for backpatching, so reverted in all but master. Also fix
SGML file header comment in master.
Reported-by: Peter Eisentraut
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/c6304b19-6ff7-f3af-0148-cf7aa7e2fbfd@enterprisedb.com
Backpatch-through: 11
|
|
This also adds references to this new chapter at relevant sections of
our documentation. Previously much of these internal details were
exposed to users, but not explained. This also updates RELEASE
SAVEPOINT.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CANbhV-E_iy9fmrErxrCh8TZTyenpfo72Hf_XD2HLDppva4dUNA@mail.gmail.com
Author: Simon Riggs, Laurenz Albe
Reviewed-by: Bruce Momjian
Backpatch-through: 11
|
|
While at it, simplify wording a bit.
Author: Takamichi Osumi <osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/TYCPR01MB8373F93F5D094A2BE648990DED259@TYCPR01MB8373.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
|
|
doc revert of commit 1703726488. Change was applied to irrelevant
branches, and was not detailed enough to be helpful in relevant
branches.
Reported-by: Peter Eisentraut, Noah Misch
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/a2dc9de4-24fc-3222-87d3-0def8057d7d8@enterprisedb.com
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
Commit 6c2003f8a1 changed the snapshot names mentioned in
SET TRANSACTION docs, however, there was one place that
the commit missed updating the name.
Back-patch to all supported versions.
Author: Japin Li
Reviewed-by: Fujii Masao
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/MEYP282MB1669BD4280044501165F8B07B64F9@MEYP282MB1669.AUSP282.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
|
|
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/YxAqYijOsLzgLQgy@momjian.us
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/Yv1Bw8J+1pYfHiRl@momjian.us
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
Also remove USING erroneously added recently.
Reported-by: Jeff Janes
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMkU=1zhCpC7hottyMWM5Pimr9vRLprSwzLg+7PgajWhKZqRzw@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
This allows the syntax to be more accurate about what clauses are
supported. Also switch an example query to use the ANSI join syntax.
Reported-by: Joel Jacobson
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/67b71d3e-0c22-44df-a223-351f14418319@www.fastmail.com
Backpatch-through: 11
|
|
Non-sql_body functions are evaluated at runtime.
Reported-by: Erki Eessaar
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/AM9PR01MB8268BF5E74E119828251FD34FE409@AM9PR01MB8268.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
Also mention that time zone abbreviations are not supported.
Reported-by: philippe.godfrin@nov.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/163888728952.1269.5167822676466793158@wrigleys.postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
It used to show direction was required for FROM/IN.
Reported-by: Rob <rirans@comcast.net>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20211015165248.isqjceyilelhnu3k@localhost
Author: Rob <rirans@comcast.net>
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
Reported-by: Rob <rirans@comcast.net>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20211016171149.yaouvlw5kvux6dvk@localhost
Author: Rob <rirans@comcast.net>
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
In ref/create_sequence.sgml <literal> tag was used for nextval function name.
This should have been <function> tag.
Author: Noboru Saito
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAM3qnJTDFFfRf5JHJ4AYrNcqXgMmj0pbH0%2Bvm%3DYva%2BpJyGymA%40mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
Reported-by: Jonathan S. Katz
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/c59ffbd5-96ac-a5a5-a401-14f627ca1405@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 11
|
|
Somehow this was in the syntax but had no description.
Reported-by: robertcorrington@gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/164228771825.31954.2719791849363756957@wrigleys.postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
Mention that the table is not modified if it already exists.
Reported-by: frank_limpert@yahoo.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/164441177106.9677.5991676148704507229@wrigleys.postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
Member tracking was added in PG 13.
Reported-by: David G. Johnston
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKFQuwY1YtxQHVWUFYvSnOjZ5VPpXjF33V52bSKEwFjK2K=1Aw@mail.gmail.com
Author: David G. Johnston
Backpatch-through: 13
|
|
We didn't explicitly say that random() uses a randomly-chosen seed
if you haven't called setseed(). Do so.
Also, remove ref/set.sgml's no-longer-accurate (and never very
relevant) statement that the seed value is multiplied by 2^31-1.
Back-patch to v12 where set.sgml's claim stopped being true.
The claim that we use a source of random bits as seed was debatable
before 4203842a1, too, so v12 seems like a good place to stop.
Per question from Carl Sopchak.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/f37bb937-9d99-08f0-4de7-80c91a3cfc2e@sopchak.me
|
|
Reported-by: axel.kluener@gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/164736074430.660.3645615289283943146@wrigleys.postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 11
|
|
Clarify that functions/procedures are dropped when any extension that
depends on them is dropped.
Reported-by: David G. Johnston
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKFQuwbPSHMDGkisRUmewopweC1bFvytVqB=a=X4GFg=4ZWxPA@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 13
|
|
Reported-by: Nikhil Shetty
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFpL5Vxastip0Jei-K-=7cKXTg=5sahSe5g=om=x68NOX8+PUA@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
Original patch by David G. Johnston.
Reported-by: David G. Johnston
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKFQuwYQCxSSuSL18skCWG8QHFswOJ3hjovHsOZUE346i4OpVQ@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
Original patch by David G. Johnston.
Reported-by: David G. Johnston
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKFQuwa4J0+WuO7kW1PLbjoEvzPN+Q_j+P2bXxNnCLaszY7ZdQ@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
Initial patch by David G. Johnston.
Reported-by: David G. Johnston
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKFQuwZpbdzceO41VE-xt1Xh8rWRRfgopTAK1wL9EhCo0Am-Sw@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
The existing wording wasn't clear enough and some details weren't
anywhere, such as the fact that autosummarization is off by default.
Improve.
Authors: Roberto Mello, Jaime Casanova, Justin Pryzby, Álvaro Herrera
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKz==bK_NoJytRyQfX8K-erCW3Ff7--oGYpiB8+ePVS7dRVW_A@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220224193520.GY9008@telsasoft.com
|
|
The previous wording was "the underlying data type's default collation
is used", which is wrong or at least misleading. The domain inherits
the base type's collation behavior, which if "default" actually can
mean that we use some non-default collation obtained from elsewhere.
Per complaint from Jian He.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CACJufxHMR8_4WooDPjjvEdaxB2hQ5a49qthci8fpKP0MKemVRQ@mail.gmail.com
|
|
switches".
This reverts commits a04ccf6df et al. in the back branches only.
There was some disagreement already over whether to back-patch
157f8739a, on the grounds that it is the sort of behavioral
change that we don't like to back-patch. Furthermore, it now
looks like the logic needs some more work, which we don't have
time for before the upcoming 14.4 release. Revert for now, and
perhaps reconsider later.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17504-76b68018e130415e@postgresql.org
|
|
psql --single-transaction is able to handle multiple -c and -f switches
in a single transaction since d5563d7d, but this had the surprising
behavior of forcing a transaction COMMIT even if psql failed with an
error in the client (for example incorrect path given to \copy), which
would generate an error, but still commit any changes that were already
applied in the backend. This commit makes the behavior more consistent,
by enforcing a transaction ROLLBACK if any commands fail, both
client-side and backend-side, so as no changes are applied if one error
happens in any of them.
Some tests are added on HEAD to provide some coverage about all that.
Backend-side errors are unreliable as IPC::Run can complain on SIGPIPE
if psql quits before reading a query result, but that should work
properly in the case where any errors come from psql itself, which is
what the original report is about.
Reported-by: Christoph Berg
Author: Kyotaro Horiguchi, Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17504-76b68018e130415e@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
This patch fixes the partitioning synopsis in the Parameters section in
the CREATE FOREIGN TABLE documentation. Follow-up for commit ce21a36cf.
Back-patch to v11 where default partition was introduced.
Reviewed by Amit Langote and Robert Haas.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPmGK17U5jEqVZuo3r38wB0VFWomEtJCBGn_h92HQzQ2sP-49Q%40mail.gmail.com
|
|
Foreign tables can be partitioned, but previous documentation commits
left the syntax synopsis both incomplete and incorrect.
Justin Pryzby and Amit Langote
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/20220521130922.GX19626@telsasoft.com
|
|
This was made optional in 959f6d6a1.
Author: Justin Pryzby
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220411020336.GB26620@telsasoft.com
Backpatch-through: 13, where -B was made optional
|
|
It's misleading to call the data directory the "synchronized data
directory" when discussing a crash scenario when using pg_rewind's
--no-sync option. Here we just remove the word "synchronized" to avoid
any possible confusion.
Author: Justin Pryzby
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220411020336.GB26620@telsasoft.com
Backpatch-through: 12, where --no-sync was added
|
|
Commit 61fa6ca79b3 accidentally wrote constrast instead of contrast.
Backpatch-through: 10
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/88903179-5ce2-3d4d-af43-7830372bdcb6@enterprisedb.com
|
|
When dealing with partitioned tables, counters for partitioned tables
are not updated when modifying child tables. This means autoanalyze may
not update optimizer statistics for the parent relations, which can
result in poor plans for some queries.
It's worth documenting this limitation, so that people are aware of it
and can take steps to mitigate it (e.g. by setting up a script executing
ANALYZE regularly).
Backpatch to v10. Older branches are affected too, of couse, but we no
longer maintain those.
Author: Justin Pryzby
Reviewed-by: Zhihong Yu, Tomas Vondra
Backpatch-through: 10
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20210913035409.GA10647%40telsasoft.com
|
|
This command flavor is supported, but there was nothing in the
documentation about it.
Author: Yugo Nagata
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220316133337.5dc9740abfa24c25ec9f67f5@sraoss.co.jp
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
Currently, during UPDATE, the unchanged replica identity key attributes
are not logged separately because they are getting logged as part of the
new tuple. But if they are stored externally then the untoasted values are
not getting logged as part of the new tuple and logical replication won't
be able to replicate such UPDATEs. So we need to log such attributes as
part of the old_key_tuple during UPDATE.
Reported-by: Haiying Tang
Author: Dilip Kumar and Amit Kapila
Reviewed-by: Alvaro Herrera, Haiying Tang, Andres Freund
Backpatch-through: 10
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/OS0PR01MB611342D0A92D4F4BF26C0F47FB229@OS0PR01MB6113.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
|
|
A very well-informed user might deduce this from what we said already,
but I'd bet against it. Lay it out explicitly.
While here, rewrite the comment about tuple routing to be more
intelligible to an average SQL user.
Per bug #17395 from Alexander Lakhin. Back-patch to v11. (The text
in this area is different in v10 and I'm not sufficiently excited
about this point to adapt the patch.)
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17395-8c326292078d1a57@postgresql.org
|
|
This is an extraction of the user-visible changes done in 410aa24,
including all the relevant documentation parts.
Author: Justin Pryzby
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220124030001.GQ23027@telsasoft.com
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
This information was nowhere to be found. This adds one note on the
page of COMMENT, and one note in the section dedicated to explicit
locking, both telling that a SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE lock is taken on the
object commented.
Author: Nikolai Berkoff
Reviewed-by: Laurenz Albe
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/_0HDHIGcCdCsUyXn22QwI2FEuNR6Fs71rtgGX6hfyBlUh5rrnE2qMmvIFu9EY4Pijr2gUmJEAXCjuNU2Oxku9TryLp9CdHllpsCfN3gD0-Y=@pm.me
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
catalog/pg_class.h was stating that REPLICA_IDENTITY_INDEX with a
dropped index is equivalent to REPLICA_IDENTITY_DEFAULT. The code tells
a different story, as it is equivalent to REPLICA_IDENTITY_NOTHING.
The behavior exists since the introduction of replica identities, and
fe7fd4e even added tests for this case but I somewhat forgot to fix this
comment.
While on it, this commit reorganizes the documentation about replica
identities on the ALTER TABLE page, and a note is added about the case
of dropped indexes with REPLICA_IDENTITY_INDEX.
Author: Michael Paquier, Wei Wang
Reviewed-by: Euler Taveira
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/OS3PR01MB6275464AD0A681A0793F56879E759@OS3PR01MB6275.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
ATTACHing a table into a partition tree whose root is published using a
publication with publish_via_partition_root set to true does not result in
the table's existing contents being replicated. This happens because
subscriber doesn't consider replicating the newly attached partition as
the root table is already in a 'ready' state.
This behavior was introduced in PG13 (83fd4532a7) where we allowed to
publish partition changes via ancestors.
We can consider fixing this limitation in the future.
Author: Amit Langote
Reviewed-by: Hou Zhijie, Amit Kapila
Backpatch-through: 13
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/OS0PR01MB5716E97F00732B52DC2BBC2594989@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
|
