| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
It's unusual to have any resjunk columns in an ON CONFLICT ... UPDATE
list, but it can happen when MULTIEXPR_SUBLINK SubPlans are present.
If it happens, the ON CONFLICT UPDATE code path would end up storing
tuples that include the values of the extra resjunk columns. That's
fairly harmless in the short run, but if new columns are added to
the table then the values would become accessible, possibly leading
to malfunctions if they don't match the datatypes of the new columns.
This had escaped notice through a confluence of missing sanity checks,
including
* There's no cross-check that a tuple presented to heap_insert or
heap_update matches the table rowtype. While it's difficult to
check that fully at reasonable cost, we can easily add assertions
that there aren't too many columns.
* The output-column-assignment cases in execExprInterp.c lacked
any sanity checks on the output column numbers, which seems like
an oversight considering there are plenty of assertion checks on
input column numbers. Add assertions there too.
* We failed to apply nodeModifyTable's ExecCheckPlanOutput() to
the ON CONFLICT UPDATE tlist. That wouldn't have caught this
specific error, since that function is chartered to ignore resjunk
columns; but it sure seems like a bad omission now that we've seen
this bug.
In HEAD, the right way to fix this is to make the processing of
ON CONFLICT UPDATE tlists work the same as regular UPDATE tlists
now do, that is don't add "SET x = x" entries, and use
ExecBuildUpdateProjection to evaluate the tlist and combine it with
old values of the not-set columns. This adds a little complication
to ExecBuildUpdateProjection, but allows removal of a comparable
amount of now-dead code from the planner.
In the back branches, the most expedient solution seems to be to
(a) use an output slot for the ON CONFLICT UPDATE projection that
actually matches the target table, and then (b) invent a variant of
ExecBuildProjectionInfo that can be told to not store values resulting
from resjunk columns, so it doesn't try to store into nonexistent
columns of the output slot. (We can't simply ignore the resjunk columns
altogether; they have to be evaluated for MULTIEXPR_SUBLINK to work.)
This works back to v10. In 9.6, projections work much differently and
we can't cheaply give them such an option. The 9.6 version of this
patch works by inserting a JunkFilter when it's necessary to get rid
of resjunk columns.
In addition, v11 and up have the reverse problem when trying to
perform ON CONFLICT UPDATE on a partitioned table. Through a
further oversight, adjust_partition_tlist() discarded resjunk columns
when re-ordering the ON CONFLICT UPDATE tlist to match a partition.
This accidentally prevented the storing-bogus-tuples problem, but
at the cost that MULTIEXPR_SUBLINK cases didn't work, typically
crashing if more than one row has to be updated. Fix by preserving
resjunk columns in that routine. (I failed to resist the temptation
to add more assertions there too, and to do some minor code
beautification.)
Per report from Andres Freund. Back-patch to all supported branches.
Security: CVE-2021-32028
|
|
While we were (mostly) careful about ensuring that the dimensions of
arrays aren't large enough to cause integer overflow, the lower bound
values were generally not checked. This allows situations where
lower_bound + dimension overflows an integer. It seems that that's
harmless so far as array reading is concerned, except that array
elements with subscripts notionally exceeding INT_MAX are inaccessible.
However, it confuses various array-assignment logic, resulting in a
potential for memory stomps.
Fix by adding checks that array lower bounds aren't large enough to
cause lower_bound + dimension to overflow. (Note: this results in
disallowing cases where the last subscript position would be exactly
INT_MAX. In principle we could probably allow that, but there's a lot
of code that computes lower_bound + dimension and would need adjustment.
It seems doubtful that it's worth the trouble/risk to allow it.)
Somewhat independently of that, array_set_element() was careless
about possible overflow when checking the subscript of a fixed-length
array, creating a different route to memory stomps. Fix that too.
Security: CVE-2021-32027
|
|
Somebody extended search_plan_tree() to treat MergeAppend exactly
like Append, which is 100% wrong, because unlike Append we can't
assume that only one input node is actively returning tuples.
Hence a cursor using a MergeAppend across a UNION ALL or inheritance
tree could falsely match a WHERE CURRENT OF query at a row that
isn't actually the cursor's current output row, but coincidentally
has the same TID (in a different table) as the current output row.
Delete the faulty code; this means that such a case will now return
an error like 'cursor "foo" is not a simply updatable scan of table
"bar"', instead of silently misbehaving. Users should not find that
surprising though, as the same cursor query could have failed that way
already depending on the chosen plan. (It would fail like that if the
sort were done with an explicit Sort node instead of MergeAppend.)
Expand the clearly-inadequate commentary to be more explicit about
what this code is doing, in hopes of forestalling future mistakes.
It's been like this for awhile, so back-patch to all supported
branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/482865.1611075182@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
|
execCurrent.c's search_plan_tree() assumed that ForeignScanStates
and CustomScanStates necessarily have a valid ss_currentRelation.
This is demonstrably untrue for postgres_fdw's remote join and
remote aggregation plans, and non-leaf custom scans might not have
an identifiable scan relation either. Avoid crashing by ignoring
such nodes when the field is null.
This solution will lead to errors like 'cursor "foo" is not a
simply updatable scan of table "bar"' in cases where maybe we
could have allowed WHERE CURRENT OF to work. That's not an issue
for postgres_fdw's usages, since joins or aggregations would render
WHERE CURRENT OF invalid anyway. But an otherwise-transparent
upper level custom scan node might find this annoying. When and if
someone cares to expend work on such a scenario, we could invent a
custom-scan-provider callback to determine what's safe.
Report and patch by David Geier, commentary by me. It's been like
this for awhile, so back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/0253344d-9bdd-11c4-7f0d-d88c02cd7991@swarm64.com
|
|
Previously this code assumed that all IndexScan nodes supported
mark/restore, which is not true since it depends on optional index AM
support functions. This could lead to errors about missing support
functions in rare edge cases of mergejoins with no sort keys, where an
unordered non-btree index scan was placed on the inner path without a
protecting Materialize node. (Normally, the fact that merge join
requires ordered input would avoid this error.)
Backpatch all the way since this bug is ancient.
Per report from Eugen Konkov on irc.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87o8jn50be.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
|
|
This is a backpatch of commit 2cccb627f1, backpatched due to popular
demand. Backpatch to all supported versions.
Author: Alexey Bashtanov
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/36823f65-050d-ae24-aa4d-a37726998240%40imap.cc
|
|
nodeSubplan.c expects that the testexpr for a hashable ANY SubPlan
has the form of one or more OpExprs whose LHS is an expression of the
outer query's, while the RHS is an expression over Params representing
output columns of the subquery. However, the planner only went as far
as verifying that the clauses were all binary OpExprs. This works
99.99% of the time, because the clauses have the right shape when
emitted by the parser --- but it's possible for function inlining to
break that, as reported by PegoraroF10. To fix, teach the planner
to check that the LHS and RHS contain the right things, or more
accurately don't contain the wrong things. Given that this has been
broken for years without anyone noticing, it seems sufficient to just
give up hashing when it happens, rather than go to the trouble of
commuting the clauses back again (which wouldn't necessarily work
anyway).
While poking at that, I also noticed that nodeSubplan.c had a baked-in
assumption that the number of hash clauses is identical to the number
of subquery output columns. Again, that's fine as far as parser output
goes, but it's not hard to break it via function inlining. There seems
little reason for that assumption though --- AFAICS, the only thing
it's buying us is not having to store the number of hash clauses
explicitly. Adding code to the planner to reject such cases would take
more code than getting nodeSubplan.c to cope, so I fixed it that way.
This has been broken for as long as we've had hashable SubPlans,
so back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1549209182255-0.post@n3.nabble.com
|
|
Convert buffile.c error handling to use ereport. This fixes cases where
I/O errors were indistinguishable from EOF or not reported. Also remove
"%m" from error messages where errno would be bogus. While we're
modifying those strings, add block numbers and short read byte counts
where appropriate.
Back-patch to all supported releases.
Reported-by: Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan.pg@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Reviewed-by: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar.ahmad@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA%2BhUKGJE04G%3D8TLK0DLypT_27D9dR8F1RQgNp0jK6qR0tZGWOw%40mail.gmail.com
|
|
Working on commit 1c455078b led me to check through FunctionCallInvoke
call sites to see if every one was being honest about (a) making sure
that fcinfo.isnull is initially false, and (b) checking its state after
the call. Sure enough, I found some violations.
The main one is that finalize_partialaggregate re-used serialfn_fcinfo
without resetting isnull, even though it clearly intends to cater for
serialfns that return NULL. There would only be an issue with a
non-strict serialfn, since it's unlikely that a serialfn would return
NULL for non-null input. We have no non-strict serialfns in core, and
there may be none in the wild either, which would account for the lack
of complaints. Still, it's clearly wrong, so back-patch that fix to
9.6 where finalize_partialaggregate was introduced.
Also, arrayfuncs.c and rowtypes.c contained various callers that were
not bothering to check for result nulls. While what's being called is
a comparison or hash function that probably *shouldn't* return null,
that's a lousy excuse for not having any check at all. There are
existing places that just Assert(!fcinfo->isnull) in comparable
situations, so I added that to the places that were calling btree
comparison or hash support functions. In the places calling
boolean-returning equality functions, it's quite cheap to have them
treat isnull as FALSE, so make those places do that. Also remove some
"locfcinfo->isnull = false" assignments that are unnecessary given the
assumption that no previous call returned null. These changes seem like
mostly neatnik-ism or debugging support, so I didn't back-patch.
|
|
ExecReScanHashJoin will destroy the join's hash table if it expects
that the inner relation will produce different rows on rescan.
Up to now it's not bothered to clear the additional pointer to that
hash table that exists in the child HashState node. However, it's
possible for the query to terminate without building a fresh hash
table (this happens if the outer relation is found to be empty
during the final rescan). So we can end with a dangling pointer
to a deleted hash table. That was harmless originally, but since
9.0 EXPLAIN ANALYZE has used that pointer to print hash table
statistics. In debug builds this reproducibly results in garbage
statistics. In non-debug builds there's frequently no ill effects,
but in principle one could get wrong EXPLAIN ANALYZE output, or
perhaps even a crash if free() has released the hashtable memory
back to the OS.
To fix, just make sure we clear the additional pointer when destroying
the hash table. In problematic cases, EXPLAIN ANALYZE will then print
no hashtable statistics (reverting to its pre-9.0 behavior). This isn't
ideal, but since the problem manifests only in unusual corner cases,
it's hard to justify taking any risks to do better in the back
branches. A follow-on patch will improve matters in HEAD.
Konstantin Knizhnik and Tom Lane, per diagnosis by Thomas Munro
of a trouble report from Alvaro Herrera.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200323165059.GA24950@alvherre.pgsql
|
|
The code checking whether an aggregate transition value needs to be
reparented into the current context has always only compared the
transition return value with the previous transition value by datum,
i.e. without regard for NULLness. This normally works, because when
the transition function returns NULL (via fcinfo->isnull), it'll
return a value that won't be the same as its input value.
But there's no hard requirement that that's the case. And it turns
out, it's possible to hit this case (see discussion or reproducers),
leading to a non-null transition value not being reparented, followed
by a crash caused by that.
Instead of adding another comparison of NULLness, instead have
ExecAggTransReparent() ensure that pergroup->transValue ends up as 0
when the new transition value is NULL. That avoids having to add an
additional branch to the much more common cases of the transition
function returning the old transition value (which is a pointer in
this case), and when the new value is different, but not NULL.
In branches since 69c3936a149, also deduplicate the reparenting code
between the expression evaluation based transitions, and the path for
ordered aggregates.
Reported-By: Teodor Sigaev, Nikita Glukhov
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/bd34e930-cfec-ea9b-3827-a8bc50891393@sigaev.ru
Backpatch: 9.4-, this issue has existed since at least 7.4
|
|
Commit 9b63c13f0 turns out to have been fundamentally misguided:
the parent node's subPlan list is by no means the only way in which
a child SubPlan node can be hooked into the outer execution state.
As shown in bug #16213 from Matt Jibson, we can also get short-lived
tuple table slots added to the outer es_tupleTable list. At this point
I have little faith that there aren't other possible connections as
well; the long time it took to notice this problem shows that this
isn't a heavily-exercised situation.
Therefore, revert that fix, returning to the coding that passed a
NULL parent plan pointer down to the transiently-built subexpressions.
That gives us a pretty good guarantee that they won't hook into the
outer executor state in any way. But then we need some other solution
to make SubPlans work. Adopt the solution speculated about in the
previous commit's log message: do expression initialization at plan
startup for just those VALUES rows containing SubPlans, abandoning the
goal of reclaiming memory intra-query for those rows. In practice it
seems unlikely that queries containing a vast number of VALUES rows
would be using SubPlans in them, so this should not give up much.
(BTW, this test case also refutes my claim in connection with the prior
commit that the issue only arises with use of LATERAL. That was just
wrong: some variants of SubLink always produce SubPlans.)
As with previous patch, back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16213-871ac3bc208ecf23@postgresql.org
|
|
A view with conditional INSTEAD rules and no unconditional INSTEAD
rules or INSTEAD OF triggers is not auto-updatable. Previously we
relied on a check in the executor to catch this, but that's
problematic since the planner may fail to properly handle such a query
and thus return a particularly unhelpful error to the user, before
reaching the executor check.
Instead, trap this in the rewriter and report the correct error there.
Doing so also allows us to include more useful error detail than the
executor check can provide. This doesn't change the existing behaviour
of updatable views; it merely ensures that useful error messages are
reported when a view isn't updatable.
Per report from Pengzhou Tang, though not adopting that suggested fix.
Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAG4reAQn+4xB6xHJqWdtE0ve_WqJkdyCV4P=trYr4Kn8_3_PEA@mail.gmail.com
|
|
Our algorithm for choosing batch numbers turned out not to work
effectively for multi-billion key inner relations. We would use
more hash bits than we have, and effectively concentrate all tuples
into a smaller number of batches than we intended. While ideally
we should switch to wider hashes, for now, change the algorithm to
one that effectively gives up bits from the bucket number when we
don't have enough bits. That means we'll finish up with longer
bucket chains than would be ideal, but that's better than having
batches that don't fit in work_mem and can't be divided.
Batch-patch to all supported releases.
Author: Thomas Munro
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, thanks also to Tomas Vondra, Alvaro Herrera, Andres Freund for testing and discussion
Reported-by: James Coleman
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16104-dc11ed911f1ab9df%40postgresql.org
|
|
Revert part of commit 19df1702f5.
Early shutdown was added by that commit so that we could collect
statistics from workers, but unfortunately, it interacted badly with
rescans. The problem is that we ended up destroying the parallel context
which is required for rescans. This leads to rescans of a Limit node over
a Gather node to produce unpredictable results as it tries to access
destroyed parallel context. By reverting the early shutdown code, we
might lose statistics in some cases of Limit over Gather [Merge], but that
will require further study to fix.
Reported-by: Jerry Sievers
Diagnosed-by: Thomas Munro
Author: Amit Kapila
Backpatch-through: 9.6
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87ims2amh6.fsf@jsievers.enova.com
|
|
Since WITH CHECK OPTION was introduced, ExecInitModifyTable has
initialized WCO expressions with the wrong plan node as parent -- that is,
it passed its input subplan not the ModifyTable node itself. Up to now
we thought this was harmless, but bug #16006 from Vinay Banakar shows it's
not: if the input node is a SubqueryScan then ExecInitWholeRowVar can get
confused into doing the wrong thing. (The fact that ExecInitWholeRowVar
contains such logic is certainly a horrid kluge that doesn't deserve to
live, but figuring out another way to do that is a task for some other day.)
Andres had already noticed the wrong-parent mistake and fixed it in commit
148e632c0, but not being aware of any user-visible consequences, he quite
reasonably didn't back-patch. This patch is simply a back-patch of
148e632c0, plus addition of a test case based on bug #16006. I also added
the test case to v12/HEAD, even though the bug is already fixed there.
Back-patch to all supported branches. 9.4 lacks RLS policies so the
new test case doesn't work there, but I'm pretty sure a test could be
devised based on using a whole-row Var in a plain WITH CHECK OPTION
condition. (I lack the cycles to do so myself, though.)
Andres Freund and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16006-99290d2e4642cbd5@postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181205225213.hiwa3kgoxeybqcqv@alap3.anarazel.de
|
|
The stated reason for acquiring predicate locks on heap pages hasn't
existed since commit c01262a8, so fix the comment. Perhaps in a later
release we'll also be able to change the code to use tuple locks.
Back-patch all the way.
Reviewed-by: Ashwin Agrawal
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm%3D2GK3FVdnt5V3d%2Bh9njWipCv_fNL%3DwjxyUhzsF%3D0PcbNg%40mail.gmail.com
|
|
When this code was initially introduced in commit d1b7c1ff, the structure
used was SharedPlanStateInstrumentation, but later when it got changed to
Instrumentation structure in commit b287df70, we forgot to update the
comment.
Reported-by: Wu Fei
Author: Wu Fei
Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila
Backpatch-through: 9.6
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/52E6E0843B9D774C8C73D6CF64402F0562215EB2@G08CNEXMBPEKD02.g08.fujitsu.local
|
|
Historically we forbade datatype-specific comparison functions from
returning INT_MIN, so that it would be safe to invert the sort order
just by negating the comparison result. However, this was never
really safe for comparison functions that directly return the result
of memcmp(), strcmp(), etc, as POSIX doesn't place any such restriction
on those library functions. Buildfarm results show that at least on
recent Linux on s390x, memcmp() actually does return INT_MIN sometimes,
causing sort failures.
The agreed-on answer is to remove this restriction and fix relevant
call sites to not make such an assumption; code such as "res = -res"
should be replaced by "INVERT_COMPARE_RESULT(res)". The same is needed
in a few places that just directly negated the result of memcmp or
strcmp.
To help find places having this problem, I've also added a compile option
to nbtcompare.c that causes some of the commonly used comparators to
return INT_MIN/INT_MAX instead of their usual -1/+1. It'd likely be
a good idea to have at least one buildfarm member running with
"-DSTRESS_SORT_INT_MIN". That's far from a complete test of course,
but it should help to prevent fresh introductions of such bugs.
This is a longstanding portability hazard, so back-patch to all supported
branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180928185215.ffoq2xrq5d3pafna@alap3.anarazel.de
|
|
In a case where we have multiple relation-scan nodes in a cursor plan,
such as a scan of an inheritance tree, it's possible to fetch from a
given scan node, then rewind the cursor and fetch some row from an
earlier scan node. In such a case, execCurrent.c mistakenly thought
that the later scan node was still active, because ExecReScan hadn't
done anything to make it look not-active. We'd get some sort of
failure in the case of a SeqScan node, because the node's scan tuple
slot would be pointing at a HeapTuple whose t_self gets reset to
invalid by heapam.c. But it seems possible that for other relation
scan node types we'd actually return a valid tuple TID to the caller,
resulting in updating or deleting a tuple that shouldn't have been
considered current. To fix, forcibly clear the ScanTupleSlot in
ExecScanReScan.
Another issue here, which seems only latent at the moment but could
easily become a live bug in future, is that rewinding a cursor does
not necessarily lead to *immediately* applying ExecReScan to every
scan-level node in the plan tree. Upper-level nodes will think that
they can postpone that call if their child node is already marked
with chgParam flags. I don't see a way for that to happen today in
a plan tree that's simple enough for execCurrent.c's search_plan_tree
to understand, but that's one heck of a fragile assumption. So, add
some logic in search_plan_tree to detect chgParam flags being set on
nodes that it descended to/through, and assume that that means we
should consider lower scan nodes to be logically reset even if their
ReScan call hasn't actually happened yet.
Per bug #15395 from Matvey Arye. This has been broken for a long time,
so back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/153764171023.14986.280404050547008575@wrigleys.postgresql.org
|
|
The EvalPlanQual machinery assumes that any initplans (that is,
uncorrelated sub-selects) used during an EPQ recheck would have already
been evaluated during the main query; this is implicit in the fact that
execPlan pointers are not copied into the EPQ estate's es_param_exec_vals.
But it's possible for that assumption to fail, if the initplan is only
reached conditionally. For example, a sub-select inside a CASE expression
could be reached during a recheck when it had not been previously, if the
CASE test depends on a column that was just updated.
This bug is old, appearing to date back to my rewrite of EvalPlanQual in
commit 9f2ee8f28, but was not detected until Kyle Samson reported a case.
To fix, force all not-yet-evaluated initplans used within the EPQ plan
subtree to be evaluated at the start of the recheck, before entering the
EPQ environment. This could be inefficient, if such an initplan is
expensive and goes unused again during the recheck --- but that's piling
one layer of improbability atop another. It doesn't seem worth adding
more complexity to prevent that, at least not in the back branches.
It was convenient to use the new-in-v11 ExecEvalParamExecParams function
to implement this, but I didn't like either its name or the specifics of
its API, so revise that.
Back-patch all the way. Rather than rewrite the patch to avoid depending
on bms_next_member() in the oldest branches, I chose to back-patch that
function into 9.4 and 9.3. (This isn't the first time back-patches have
needed that, and it exhausted my patience.) I also chose to back-patch
some test cases added by commits 71404af2a and 342a1ffa2 into 9.4 and 9.3,
so that the 9.x versions of eval-plan-qual.spec are all the same.
Andrew Gierth diagnosed the problem and contributed the added test cases,
though the actual code changes are by me.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/A033A40A-B234-4324-BE37-272279F7B627@tripadvisor.com
|
|
This patch removes two sources of interference between nominally
independent functions when one SPI-using function calls another,
perhaps without knowing that it does so.
Chapman Flack pointed out that xml.c's query_to_xml_internal() expects
SPI_tuptable and SPI_processed to stay valid across datatype output
function calls; but it's possible that such a call could involve
re-entrant use of SPI. It seems likely that there are similar hazards
elsewhere, if not in the core code then in third-party SPI users.
Previously SPI_finish() reset SPI's API globals to zeroes/nulls, which
would typically make for a crash in such a situation. Restoring them
to the values they had at SPI_connect() seems like a considerably more
useful behavior, and it still meets the design goal of not leaving any
dangling pointers to tuple tables of the function being exited.
Also, cause SPI_connect() to reset these variables to zeroes/nulls after
saving them. This prevents interference in the opposite direction: it's
possible that a SPI-using function that's only ever been tested standalone
contains assumptions that these variables start out as zeroes. That was
the case as long as you were the outermost SPI user, but not so much for
an inner user. Now it's consistent.
Report and fix suggestion by Chapman Flack, actual patch by me.
Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9fa25bef-2e4f-1c32-22a4-3ad0723c4a17@anastigmatix.net
|
|
When executing a SubPlan in an expression, the EState's direction
field was left alone, resulting in an attempt to execute the subplan
backwards if it was encountered during a backwards scan of a cursor.
Also, though much less likely, it was possible to reach the execution
of an InitPlan while in backwards-scan state.
Repair by saving/restoring estate->es_direction and forcing forward
scan mode in the relevant places.
Backpatch all the way, since this has been broken since 8.3 (prior to
commit c7ff7663e, SubPlans had their own EStates rather than sharing
the parent plan's, so there was no confusion over scan direction).
Per bug #15336 reported by Vladimir Baranoff; analysis and patch by
me, review by Tom Lane.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/153449812167.1304.1741624125628126322@wrigleys.postgresql.org
|
|
Currently, we release the asynchronous resources as soon as it is evident
that no more rows will be needed e.g. when a Limit is filled. This can be
problematic especially for custom and foreign scans where we can scan
backward. Fix that by disallowing the shutting down of resources in such
cases.
Reported-by: Robert Haas
Analysed-by: Robert Haas and Amit Kapila
Author: Amit Kapila
Reviewed-by: Robert Haas
Backpatch-through: 9.6 where this code was introduced
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/86137f17-1dfb-42f9-7421-82fd786b04a1@anayrat.info
|
|
The buffer usage stats is accounted only for the execution phase of the
node. For Gather and Gather Merge nodes, such stats are accumulated at
the time of shutdown of workers which is done after execution of node due
to which we missed to account them for such nodes. Fix it by treating
nodes as running while we shut down them.
We can also miss accounting for a Limit node when Gather or Gather Merge
is beneath it, because it can finish the execution before shutting down
such nodes. So we allow a Limit node to shut down the resources before it
completes the execution.
In the passing fix the gather node code to allow workers to shut down as
soon as we find that all the tuples from the workers have been retrieved.
The original code use to do that, but is accidently removed by commit
01edb5c7fc.
Reported-by: Adrien Nayrat
Author: Amit Kapila and Robert Haas
Reviewed-by: Robert Haas and Andres Freund
Backpatch-through: 9.6 where this code was introduced
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/86137f17-1dfb-42f9-7421-82fd786b04a1@anayrat.info
|
|
In the leader backend, we don't track the buffer usage for ExecutorStart
phase whereas in worker backend we track it for ExecutorStart phase as
well. This leads to different value for buffer usage stats for the
parallel and non-parallel query. Change the code so that worker backend
also starts tracking buffer usage after ExecutorStart.
Author: Amit Kapila and Robert Haas
Reviewed-by: Robert Haas and Andres Freund
Backpatch-through: 9.6 where this code was introduced
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/86137f17-1dfb-42f9-7421-82fd786b04a1@anayrat.info
|
|
I was confused by what "intended to be parallel serially" meant, until
Robert Haas and David G. Johnston explained it. Rephrase the comment to
make it more clear, using David's suggested wording.
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1fec9022-41e8-e484-70ce-2179b08c2092%40iki.fi
|
|
A collection of typos I happened to spot while reading code, as well as
grepping for common mistakes.
Backpatch to all supported versions, as applicable, to avoid conflicts
when backporting other commits in the future.
|
|
The impact of VARIADIC on the combine/serialize/deserialize support
functions of an aggregate wasn't thought through carefully. There is
actually no impact, because variadicity isn't passed through to these
functions (and it doesn't seem like it would need to be). However,
lookup_agg_function was mistakenly told to check things as though it were
passed through. The net result was that it was impossible to declare an
aggregate that had both VARIADIC input and parallelism support functions.
In passing, fix a runtime check in nodeAgg.c for the combine function's
strictness to make its error message agree with the creation-time check.
The previous message was actually backwards, and it doesn't seem like
there's a good reason to have two versions of this message text anyway.
Back-patch to 9.6 where parallel aggregation was introduced.
Alexey Bashtanov; message fix by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/f86dde87-fef4-71eb-0480-62754aaca01b@imap.cc
|
|
"UPDATE/DELETE WHERE CURRENT OF cursor_name" failed, with an error message
like "cannot extract system attribute from virtual tuple", if the cursor
was using a index-only scan for the target table. Fix it by digging the
current TID out of the indexscan state.
It seems likely that the same failure could occur for CustomScan plans
and perhaps some FDW plan types, so that leaving this to be treated as an
internal error with an obscure message isn't as good an idea as it first
seemed. Hence, add a bit of heaptuple.c infrastructure to let us deliver
a more on-topic message. I chose to make the message match what you get
for the case where execCurrentOf can't identify the target scan node at
all, "cursor "foo" is not a simply updatable scan of table "bar"".
Perhaps it should be different, but we can always adjust that later.
In the future, it might be nice to provide hooks that would let custom
scan providers and/or FDWs deal with this in other ways; but that's
not a suitable topic for a back-patchable bug fix.
It's been like this all along, so back-patch to all supported branches.
Yugo Nagata and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180201013349.937dfc5f.nagata@sraoss.co.jp
|
|
ExecHashTableCreate allocated some memory that wasn't freed by
ExecHashTableDestroy, specifically the per-hash-key function information.
That's not a huge amount of data, but if one runs a query that repeats
a hash join enough times, it builds up. Fix by arranging for the data
in question to be kept in the hashtable's hashCxt instead of leaving it
"loose" in the query-lifespan executor context. (This ensures that we'll
also clean up anything that the hash functions allocate in fn_mcxt.)
Per report from Amit Khandekar. It's been like this forever, so back-patch
to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJ3gD9cFofAWGvcxLOxDHC=B0hjtW8yGmUsF2hdGh97CM38=7g@mail.gmail.com
|
|
An updating query that reads a CTE within an InitPlan or SubPlan could get
incorrect results if it updates rows that are concurrently being modified.
This is caused by CteScanNext supposing that nothing inside its recursive
ExecProcNode call could change which read pointer is selected in the CTE's
shared tuplestore. While that's normally true because of scoping
considerations, it can break down if an EPQ plan tree gets built during the
call, because EvalPlanQualStart builds execution trees for all subplans
whether they're going to be used during the recheck or not. And it seems
like a pretty shaky assumption anyway, so let's just reselect our own read
pointer here.
Per bug #14870 from Andrei Gorita. This has been broken since CTEs were
implemented, so back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20171024155358.1471.82377@wrigleys.postgresql.org
|
|
When a Gather or Gather Merge node is started and stopped multiple
times, accumulate instrumentation data only once, at the end, instead
of after each execution, to avoid recording inflated totals.
This is a back-port of commit 8526bcb2df76d5171b4f4d6dc7a97560a73a5eff
by Amit Kapila.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/20171127175631.GA405@depesz.com
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAA4eK1KT3BYj50qWhK5qBF=LDzQCoUVSFZjcK3mHoJJeWA+fNA@mail.gmail.com
|
|
I noticed that _SPI_execute_plan initially sets spierrcontext.arg = NULL,
and only fills it in some time later. If an error were to happen in
between, _SPI_error_callback would try to dereference the null pointer.
This is unlikely --- there's not much between those points except
push-snapshot calls --- but it's clearly not impossible. Tweak the
callback to do nothing if the pointer isn't set yet.
It's been like this for awhile, so back-patch to all supported branches.
|
|
rewriteTargetListUD's processing is dependent on the relkind of the query's
target table. That was fine at the time it was made to act that way, even
for queries on inheritance trees, because all tables in an inheritance tree
would necessarily be plain tables. However, the 9.5 feature addition
allowing some members of an inheritance tree to be foreign tables broke the
assumption that rewriteTargetListUD's output tlist could be applied to all
child tables with nothing more than column-number mapping. This led to
visible failures if foreign child tables had row-level triggers, and would
also break in cases where child tables belonged to FDWs that used methods
other than CTID for row identification.
To fix, delay running rewriteTargetListUD until after the planner has
expanded inheritance, so that it is applied separately to the (already
mapped) tlist for each child table. We can conveniently call it from
preprocess_targetlist. Refactor associated code slightly to avoid the
need to heap_open the target relation multiple times during
preprocess_targetlist. (The APIs remain a bit ugly, particularly around
the point of which steps scribble on parse->targetList and which don't.
But avoiding such scribbling would require a change in FDW callback APIs,
which is more pain than it's worth.)
Also fix ExecModifyTable to ensure that "tupleid" is reset to NULL when
we transition from rows providing a CTID to rows that don't. (That's
really an independent bug, but it manifests in much the same cases.)
Add a regression test checking one manifestation of this problem, which
was that row-level triggers on a foreign child table did not work right.
Back-patch to 9.5 where the problem was introduced.
Etsuro Fujita, reviewed by Ildus Kurbangaliev and Ashutosh Bapat
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170514150525.0346ba72@postgrespro.ru
|
|
When nodeValuesscan.c was written, it was impossible to have a SubPlan in
VALUES --- any sub-SELECT there would have to be uncorrelated and thereby
would produce an InitPlan instead. We therefore took a shortcut in the
logic that throws away a ValuesScan's per-row expression evaluation data
structures. This was broken by the introduction of LATERAL however; a
sub-SELECT containing a lateral reference produces a correlated SubPlan.
The cleanest fix for this would be to give up the optimization of
discarding the expression eval state. But that still seems pretty
unappetizing for long VALUES lists. It seems to work to just prevent
the subexpressions from hooking into the ValuesScan node's subPlan
list, so let's do that and see how well it works. (If this breaks,
due to additional connections between the subexpressions and the outer
query structures, we might consider compromises like throwing away data
only for VALUES rows not containing SubPlans.)
Per bug #14924 from Christian Duta. Back-patch to 9.3 where LATERAL
was introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20171124120836.1463.5310@wrigleys.postgresql.org
|
|
When strict aggregate combine functions, used in multi-stage/parallel
aggregation, returned NULL, we didn't check for that, invoking the
combine function with NULL the next round, despite it being strict.
The equivalent code invoking normal transition functions has a check
for that situation, which did not get copied in a7de3dc5c346. Fix the
bug by adding the equivalent check.
Based on a quick look I could not find any strict combine functions in
core actually returning NULL, and it doesn't seem very likely external
users have done so. So this isn't likely to have caused issues in
practice.
Add tests verifying transition / combine functions returning NULL is
tested.
Reported-By: Andres Freund
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20171121033642.7xvmjqrl4jdaaat3@alap3.anarazel.de
Backpatch: 9.6, where parallel aggregation was introduced
|
|
It turns out we misdiagnosed what the real problem was. Revert the
previous changes, because they may have worse consequences going
forward. A better fix is forthcoming.
The simplistic test case is kept, though disabled.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20171102112019.33wb7g5wp4zpjelu@alap3.anarazel.de
|
|
If we try to run a parallel plan in serial mode because, for example,
it's going to be scanned via a cursor, but for some reason we're
already in parallel mode (for example because an outer query is
running in parallel), we'd incorrectly try to launch workers.
Fix by adding a flag to the EState, so that we can be certain that
ExecutePlan() and ExecGather()/ExecGatherMerge() will have the same
idea about whether we are executing serially or in parallel.
Report and fix by Amit Kapila with help from Kuntal Ghosh. A few
tweaks by me.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAA4eK1+_BuZrmVCeua5Eqnm4Co9DAXdM5HPAOE2J19ePbR912Q@mail.gmail.com
|
|
If we merge the transition calculations for two different aggregates,
it's reasonable to assume that the transition function should not care
which of those Aggref structs it gets from AggGetAggref(). It is not
reasonable to make the same assumption about an aggregate final function,
however. Commit 804163bc2 broke this, as it will pass whichever Aggref
was first associated with the transition state in both cases.
This doesn't create an observable bug so far as the core system is
concerned, because the only existing uses of AggGetAggref() are in
ordered-set aggregates that happen to not pay attention to anything
but the input properties of the Aggref; and besides that, we disabled
sharing of transition calculations for OSAs yesterday. Nonetheless,
if some third-party code were using AggGetAggref() in a normal aggregate,
they would be entitled to call this a bug. Hence, back-patch the fix
to 9.6 where the problem was introduced.
In passing, improve some of the comments about transition state sharing.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAB4ELO5RZhOamuT9Xsf72ozbenDLLXZKSk07FiSVsuJNZB861A@mail.gmail.com
|
|
This ought to work, but the built-in OSAs are not capable of coping,
because their final-functions destructively modify their transition
state (specifically, the contained tuplesort object). That was fine
when those functions were written, but commit 804163bc2 moved the
goalposts without telling orderedsetaggs.c.
We should fix the built-in OSAs to support this, but it will take
a little work, especially if we don't want to sacrifice performance
in the normal non-shared-state case. Given that it took a year after
9.6 release for anyone to notice this bug, we should not prioritize
sharable-state over nonsharable-state performance. And a proper fix
is likely to be more complicated than we'd want to back-patch, too.
Therefore, let's just put in this stop-gap patch to prevent nodeAgg.c
from choosing to use shared state for OSAs. We can revert it in HEAD
when we get a better fix.
Report from Lukas Eder, diagnosis by me, patch by David Rowley.
Back-patch to 9.6 where the problem was introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAB4ELO5RZhOamuT9Xsf72ozbenDLLXZKSk07FiSVsuJNZB861A@mail.gmail.com
|
|
The logical decoding functions do BeginInternalSubTransaction and
RollbackAndReleaseCurrentSubTransaction to clean up after themselves.
It turns out that AtEOSubXact_SPI has an unrecognized assumption that
we always need to cancel the active SPI operation in the SPI context
that surrounds the subtransaction (if there is one). That's true
when the RollbackAndReleaseCurrentSubTransaction call is coming from
the SPI-using function itself, but not when it's happening inside
some unrelated function invoked by a SPI query. In practice the
affected callers are the various PLs.
To fix, record the current subtransaction ID when we begin a SPI
operation, and clean up only if that ID is the subtransaction being
canceled.
Also, remove AtEOSubXact_SPI's assertion that it must have cleaned
up the surrounding SPI context's active tuptable. That's proven
wrong by the same test case.
Also clarify (or, if you prefer, reinterpret) the calling conventions
for _SPI_begin_call and _SPI_end_call. The memory context cleanup
in the latter means that these have always had the flavor of a matched
resource-management pair, but they weren't documented that way before.
Per report from Ben Chobot.
Back-patch to 9.4 where logical decoding came in. In principle,
the SPI changes should go all the way back, since the problem dates
back to commit 7ec1c5a86. But given the lack of field complaints
it seems few people are using internal subtransactions in this way.
So I don't feel a need to take any risks in 9.2/9.3.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/73FBA179-C68C-4540-9473-71E865408B15@silentmedia.com
|
|
When some tuple versions in an update chain are frozen due to them being
older than freeze_min_age, the xmax/xmin trail can become broken. This
breaks HOT (and probably other things). A subsequent VACUUM can break
things in more serious ways, such as leaving orphan heap-only tuples
whose root HOT redirect items were removed. This can be seen because
index creation (or REINDEX) complain like
ERROR: XX000: failed to find parent tuple for heap-only tuple at (0,7) in table "t"
Because of relfrozenxid contraints, we cannot avoid the freezing of the
early tuples, so we must cope with the results: whenever we see an Xmin
of FrozenTransactionId, consider it a match for whatever the previous
Xmax value was.
This problem seems to have appeared in 9.3 with multixact changes,
though strictly speaking it seems unrelated.
Since 9.4 we have commit 37484ad2a "Change the way we mark tuples as
frozen", so the fix is simple: just compare the raw Xmin (still stored
in the tuple header, since freezing merely set an infomask bit) to the
Xmax. But in 9.3 we rewrite the Xmin value to FrozenTransactionId, so
the original value is lost and we have nothing to compare the Xmax with.
To cope with that case we need to compare the Xmin with FrozenXid,
assume it's a match, and hope for the best. Sadly, since you can
pg_upgrade a 9.3 instance containing half-frozen pages to newer
releases, we need to keep the old check in newer versions too, which
seems a bit brittle; I hope we can somehow get rid of that.
I didn't optimize the new function for performance. The new coding is
probably a bit slower than before, since there is a function call rather
than a straight comparison, but I'd rather have it work correctly than
be fast but wrong.
This is a followup after 20b655224249 fixed a few related problems.
Apparently, in 9.6 and up there are more ways to get into trouble, but
in 9.3 - 9.5 I cannot reproduce a problem anymore with this patch, so
there must be a separate bug.
Reported-by: Peter Geoghegan
Diagnosed-by: Peter Geoghegan, Michael Paquier, Daniel Wood,
Yi Wen Wong, Álvaro
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-Wznm4rCrhFAiwKPWTpEw2bXDtgROZK7jWWGucXeH3D1fmA@mail.gmail.com
|
|
Etsuro Fujita
|
|
This back-patches commit 32470825d36d99a81347ee36c181d609c952c061
into 9.6, primarily to make buildfarm member culicidae happy.
Unlike the HEAD patch, avoid changing the existing API of
CreateParallelContext; instead we just switch to using
CreateParallelContextForExternalFunction, even for core functions.
Petr Jelinek, with a bunch of basically-cosmetic adjustments by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/548f9c1d-eafa-e3fa-9da8-f0cc2f654e60@2ndquadrant.com
|
|
From: Josh Soref <jsoref@gmail.com>
|
|
The loops in ExecHashJoinNewBatch(), ExecHashIncreaseNumBatches(), and
ExecHashRemoveNextSkewBucket() are all capable of iterating over many
tuples without ever doing a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS, so that the backend
might fail to respond to SIGINT or SIGTERM for an unreasonably long time.
Fix that. In the case of ExecHashJoinNewBatch(), it seems useful to put
the added CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS into ExecHashJoinGetSavedTuple() rather
than directly in the loop, because that will also ensure that both
principal code paths through ExecHashJoinOuterGetTuple() will do a
CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS, which seems like a good idea to avoid surprises.
Back-patch to all supported branches.
Tom Lane and Thomas Munro
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/6044.1487121720@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
|
Backpatch to all supported versions, where applicable, to make backpatching
of future fixes go more smoothly.
Josh Soref
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CACZqfqCf+5qRztLPgmmosr-B0Ye4srWzzw_mo4c_8_B_mtjmJQ@mail.gmail.com
|
|
A client copy can't work inside a function because the FE/BE wire protocol
doesn't support nesting of a COPY operation within query results. (Maybe
it could, but the protocol spec doesn't suggest that clients should support
this, and libpq for one certainly doesn't.)
In most PLs, this prohibition is enforced by spi.c, but SQL functions don't
use SPI. A comparison of _SPI_execute_plan() and init_execution_state()
shows that rejecting client COPY is the only discrepancy in what they
allow, so there's no other similar bugs.
This is an astonishingly ancient oversight, so back-patch to all supported
branches.
Report: https://postgr.es/m/BY2PR05MB2309EABA3DEFA0143F50F0D593780@BY2PR05MB2309.namprd05.prod.outlook.com
|
|
When the input value to a CoerceToDomain expression node is a read-write
expanded datum, we should pass a read-only pointer to any domain CHECK
expressions and then return the original read-write pointer as the
expression result. Previously we were blindly passing the same pointer to
all the consumers of the value, making it possible for a function in CHECK
to modify or even delete the expanded value. (Since a plpgsql function
will absorb a passed-in read-write expanded array as a local variable
value, it will in fact delete the value on exit.)
A similar hazard of passing the same read-write pointer to multiple
consumers exists in domain_check() and in ExecEvalCase, so fix those too.
The fix requires adding MakeExpandedObjectReadOnly calls at the appropriate
places, which is simple enough except that we need to get the data type's
typlen from somewhere. For the domain cases, solve this by redefining
DomainConstraintRef.tcache as okay for callers to access; there wasn't any
reason for the original convention against that, other than not wanting the
API of typcache.c to be any wider than it had to be. For CASE, there's
no good solution except to add a syscache lookup during executor start.
Per bug #14472 from Marcos Castedo. Back-patch to 9.5 where expanded
values were introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15225.1482431619@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
