summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/backend/executor
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2022-03-17Revert applying column aliases to the output of whole-row Vars.Tom Lane
In commit bf7ca1587, I had the bright idea that we could make the result of a whole-row Var (that is, foo.*) track any column aliases that had been applied to the FROM entry the Var refers to. However, that's not terribly logically consistent, because now the output of the Var is no longer of the named composite type that the Var claims to emit. bf7ca1587 tried to handle that by changing the output tuple values to be labeled with a blessed RECORD type, but that's really pretty disastrous: we can wind up storing such tuples onto disk, whereupon they're not readable by other sessions. The only practical fix I can see is to give up on what bf7ca1587 tried to do, and say that the column names of tuples produced by a whole-row Var are always those of the underlying named composite type, query aliases or no. While this introduces some inconsistencies, it removes others, so it's not that awful in the abstract. What *is* kind of awful is to make such a behavioral change in a back-patched bug fix. But corrupt data is worse, so back-patched it will be. (A workaround available to anyone who's unhappy about this is to introduce an extra level of sub-SELECT, so that the whole-row Var is referring to the sub-SELECT's output and not to a named table type. Then the Var is of type RECORD to begin with and there's no issue.) Per report from Miles Delahunty. The faulty commit dates to 9.5, so back-patch to all supported branches. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2950001.1638729947@sss.pgh.pa.us
2022-02-14Fix memory leak in IndexScan node with reorderingAlexander Korotkov
Fix ExecReScanIndexScan() to free the referenced tuples while emptying the priority queue. Backpatch to all supported versions. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAHqSB9gECMENBQmpbv5rvmT3HTaORmMK3Ukg73DsX5H7EJV7jw%40mail.gmail.com Author: Aliaksandr Kalenik Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Alexander Korotkov Backpatch-through: 10
2022-02-05Test, don't just Assert, that mergejoin's inputs are in order.Tom Lane
There are two Asserts in nodeMergejoin.c that are reachable if the input data is not in the expected order. This seems way too fragile. Alexander Lakhin reported a case where the assertions could be triggered with misconfigured foreign-table partitions, and bitter experience with unstable operating system collation definitions suggests another easy route to hitting them. Neither Assert is in a place where we can't afford one more test-and-branch, so replace 'em with plain test-and-elog logic. Per bug #17395. While the reported symptom is relatively recent, collation changes could happen anytime, so back-patch to all supported branches. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17395-8c326292078d1a57@postgresql.org
2022-01-03Fix index-only scan plans, take 2.Tom Lane
Commit 4ace45677 failed to fix the problem fully, because the same issue of attempting to fetch a non-returnable index column can occur when rechecking the indexqual after using a lossy index operator. Moreover, it broke EXPLAIN for such indexquals (which indicates a gap in our test cases :-(). Revert the code changes of 4ace45677 in favor of adding a new field to struct IndexOnlyScan, containing a version of the indexqual that can be executed against the index-returned tuple without using any non-returnable columns. (The restrictions imposed by check_index_only guarantee this is possible, although we may have to recompute indexed expressions.) Support construction of that during setrefs.c processing by marking IndexOnlyScan.indextlist entries as resjunk if they can't be returned, rather than removing them entirely. (We could alternatively require setrefs.c to look up the IndexOptInfo again, but abusing resjunk this way seems like a reasonably safe way to avoid needing to do that.) This solution isn't great from an API-stability standpoint: if there are any extensions out there that build IndexOnlyScan structs directly, they'll be broken in the next minor releases. However, only a very invasive extension would be likely to do such a thing. There's no change in the Path representation, so typical planner extensions shouldn't have a problem. As before, back-patch to all supported branches. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3179992.1641150853@sss.pgh.pa.us Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17350-b5bdcf476e5badbb@postgresql.org
2021-08-30Report tuple address in data-corruption error messageAlvaro Herrera
Most data-corruption reports mention the location of the problem, but this one failed to. Add it. Backpatch all the way back. In 12 and older, also assign the ERRCODE_DATA_CORRUPTED error code as was done in commit fd6ec93bf890 for 13 and later. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/202108191637.oqyzrdtnheir@alvherre.pgsql
2021-05-10Fix mishandling of resjunk columns in ON CONFLICT ... UPDATE tlists.Tom Lane
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
2021-05-10Prevent integer overflows in array subscripting calculations.Tom Lane
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
2021-01-19Remove faulty support for MergeAppend plan with WHERE CURRENT OF.Tom Lane
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
2021-01-18Avoid crash with WHERE CURRENT OF and a custom scan plan.Tom Lane
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
2020-11-24Properly check index mark/restore in ExecSupportsMarkRestore.Andrew Gierth
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
2020-11-20Skip allocating hash table in EXPLAIN-only mode.Heikki Linnakangas
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
2020-11-03Guard against core dump from uninitialized subplan.Tom Lane
If the planner erroneously puts a non-parallel-safe SubPlan into a parallelized portion of the query tree, nodeSubplan.c will fail in the worker processes because it finds a null in es_subplanstates, which it's unable to cope with. It seems worth a test-and-elog to make that an error case rather than a core dump case. This probably should have been included in commit 16ebab688, which was responsible for allowing nulls to appear in es_subplanstates to begin with. So, back-patch to v10 where that came in. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/924226.1604422326@sss.pgh.pa.us
2020-08-14Be more careful about the shape of hashable subplan clauses.Tom Lane
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
2020-07-25Fix buffer usage stats for nodes above Gather Merge.Amit Kapila
Commit 85c9d347 addressed a similar problem for Gather and Gather Merge nodes but forgot to account for nodes above parallel nodes. This still works for nodes above Gather node because we shut down the workers for Gather node as soon as there are no more tuples. We can do a similar thing for Gather Merge as well but it seems better to account for stats during nodes shutdown after completing the execution. Reported-by: Stéphane Lorek, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais Author: Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr@dalibo.com> Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila Backpatch-through: 10, where it was introduced Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200718160206.584532a2@firost
2020-06-16Fix buffile.c error handling.Thomas Munro
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
2020-05-16Fix assertion with relation using REPLICA IDENTITY FULL in subscriberMichael Paquier
In a logical replication subscriber, a table using REPLICA IDENTITY FULL which has a primary key would try to use the primary key's index available to scan for a tuple, but an assertion only assumed as correct the case of an index associated to REPLICA IDENTITY USING INDEX. This commit corrects the assertion so as the use of a primary key index is a valid case. Reported-by: Dilip Kumar Analyzed-by: Dilip Kumar Author: Euler Taveira Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier, Masahiko Sawada Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFiTN-u64S5bUiPL1q5kwpHNd0hRnf1OE-bzxNiOs5zo84i51w@mail.gmail.com Backpatch-through: 10
2020-04-21Fix minor violations of FunctionCallInvoke usage protocol.Tom Lane
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.
2020-04-11Clear dangling pointer to avoid bogus EXPLAIN printout in a corner case.Tom Lane
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
2020-03-23Fix potential crash after constraint violation errors in partitioned tables.Andres Freund
During the reporting of constraint violations for partitioned tables, ExecPartitionCheckEmitError(), ExecConstraints(), ExecWithCheckOptions() set the slot descriptor of the input slot to the root partition's tuple desc. That's generally problematic when the slot could be used by other routines, but can cause crashes after the introduction of slots with "fixed" tuple descriptors in ad7dbee368a. The problem likely escaped detection so far for two reasons: First, currently the only known way that these routines are used with a partitioned table that is not "owned" by partitioning code is when "fast defaults" are used for the child partition. Second, as an error is raised afterwards, an "external" slot that had its descriptor changed, is very unlikely to continue being used. Even though the issue currently is only known to cause a crash for 11 (as that has both fast defaults and "fixed" slot descriptors), it seems worth applying the fix to 10 too. Potentially changing random slots is hazardous. Regression tests will be added in a separate commit, as it seems best to add them for master and 12 too. Reported-By: Daniel WM Author: Andres Freund Bug: #16293 Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16293-26f5777d10143a66@postgresql.org Backpatch: 11, 10 only
2020-02-03Add missing break out seqscan loop in logical replicationAlvaro Herrera
When replica identity is FULL (an admittedly unusual case), the loop that searches for tuples in execReplication.c didn't stop scanning the table when once a matching tuple was found. Add the missing 'break'. Note slight behavior change: we now return the first matching tuple rather than the last one. They are supposed to be indistinguishable anyway, so this shouldn't matter. Author: Konstantin Knizhnik Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/379743f6-ae91-b866-f7a2-5624e6d2b0a4@postgrespro.ru
2020-01-20Fix edge case leading to agg transitions skipping ExecAggTransReparent() calls.Andres Freund
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
2020-01-17Repair more failures with SubPlans in multi-row VALUES lists.Tom Lane
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
2020-01-14Make rewriter prevent auto-updates on views with conditional INSTEAD rules.Dean Rasheed
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
2019-12-24Rotate instead of shifting hash join batch number.Thomas Munro
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
2019-11-26Don't shut down Gather[Merge] early under Limit.Amit Kapila
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, testcase by Vignesh C Backpatch-through: 9.6 Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87ims2amh6.fsf@jsievers.enova.com
2019-09-12Fix usage of whole-row variables in WCO and RLS policy expressions.Tom Lane
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
2019-07-10Pass QueryEnvironment down to EvalPlanQual's EState.Thomas Munro
Otherwise the executor can't see trigger transition tables during EPQ evaluation. Fixes bug #15900 and almost certainly also #15720. Back-patch to 10, where trigger transition tables landed. Author: Alex Aktsipetrov Reviewed-by: Thomas Munro, Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15900-bc482754fe8d7415%40postgresql.org Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15720-38c2b29e5d720187%40postgresql.org
2019-06-28Fix misleading comment in nodeIndexonlyscan.c.Thomas Munro
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
2019-06-07Fix inconsistency in comments atop ExecParallelEstimate.Amit Kapila
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
2019-05-23Fix array size allocation for HashAggregate hash keys.Andrew Gierth
When there were duplicate columns in the hash key list, the array sizes could be miscomputed, resulting in access off the end of the array. Adjust the computation to ensure the array is always large enough. (I considered whether the duplicates could be removed in planning, but I can't rule out the possibility that duplicate columns might have different hash functions assigned. Simpler to just make sure it works at execution time regardless.) Bug apparently introduced in fc4b3dea2 as part of narrowing down the tuples stored in the hashtable. Reported by Colm McHugh of Salesforce, though I didn't use their patch. Backpatch back to version 10 where the bug was introduced. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFeeJoKKu0u+A_A9R9316djW-YW3-+Gtgvy3ju655qRHR3jtdA@mail.gmail.com
2019-04-08Fix EvalPlanQualStart to handle partitioned result rels correctly.Tom Lane
The es_root_result_relations array needs to be shallow-copied in the same way as the main es_result_relations array, else EPQ rechecks on partitioned result relations fail, as seen in bug #15677 from Norbert Benkocs. Amit Langote, isolation test case added by me Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15677-0bf089579b4cd02d@postgresql.org Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/19321.1554567786@sss.pgh.pa.us
2019-04-07Clean up side-effects of commits ab5fcf2b0 et al.Tom Lane
Before those commits, partitioning-related code in the executor could assume that ModifyTableState.resultRelInfo[] contains only leaf partitions. However, now a fully-pruned update results in a dummy ModifyTable that references the root partitioned table, and that breaks some stuff. In v11, this led to an assertion or core dump in the tuple routing code. Fix by disabling tuple routing, since we don't need that anyway. (I chose to do that in HEAD as well for safety, even though the problem doesn't manifest in HEAD as it stands.) In v10, this confused ExecInitModifyTable's decision about whether it needed to close the root table. But we can get rid of that altogether by being smarter about where to find the root table. Note that since the referenced commits haven't shipped yet, this isn't fixing any bug the field has seen. Amit Langote, per a report from me Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20710.1554582479@sss.pgh.pa.us
2019-01-19Fix outdated commentPeter Eisentraut
The issue the comment is referring to was fixed by 08859bb5c2cebc132629ca838113d27bb31b990c.
2018-10-05Allow btree comparison functions to return INT_MIN.Tom Lane
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
2018-09-25Remove obsolete commentAlvaro Herrera
The documented shortcoming was actually fixed in 4c728f3829 so the comment is not true anymore.
2018-09-23Fix failure in WHERE CURRENT OF after rewinding the referenced cursor.Tom Lane
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
2018-09-17Fix parsetree representation of XMLTABLE(XMLNAMESPACES(DEFAULT ...)).Tom Lane
The original coding for XMLTABLE thought it could represent a default namespace by a T_String Value node with a null string pointer. That's not okay, though; in particular outfuncs.c/readfuncs.c are not on board with such a representation, meaning you'll get a null pointer crash if you try to store a view or rule containing this construct. To fix, change the parsetree representation so that we have a NULL list element, instead of a bogus Value node. This isn't really a functional limitation since default XML namespaces aren't yet implemented in the executor; you'd just get "DEFAULT namespace is not supported" anyway. But crashes are not nice, so back-patch to v10 where this syntax was added. Ordinarily we'd consider a parsetree representation change to be un-backpatchable; but since existing releases would crash on the way to storing such constructs, there can't be any existing views/rules to be incompatible with. Per report from Andrey Lepikhov. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3690074f-abd2-56a9-144a-aa5545d7a291@postgrespro.ru
2018-09-15Fix failure with initplans used conditionally during EvalPlanQual rechecks.Tom Lane
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
2018-09-07Save/restore SPI's global variables in SPI_connect() and SPI_finish().Tom Lane
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
2018-08-17Set scan direction appropriately for SubPlans (bug #15336)Andrew Gierth
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
2018-08-13Adjust comment atop ExecShutdownNode.Amit Kapila
After commits a315b967cc and b805b63ac2, part of the comment atop ExecShutdownNode is redundant. Adjust it. Author: Amit Kapila Backpatch-through: 10 where both the mentioned commits are present. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/86137f17-1dfb-42f9-7421-82fd786b04a1@anayrat.info
2018-08-13Prohibit shutting down resources if there is a possibility of back up.Amit Kapila
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
2018-08-13Avoid query-lifetime memory leaks in XMLTABLE (bug #15321)Andrew Gierth
Multiple calls to XMLTABLE in a query (e.g. laterally applying it to a table with an xml column, an important use-case) were leaking large amounts of memory into the per-query context, blowing up memory usage. Repair by reorganizing memory context usage in nodeTableFuncscan; use the usual per-tuple context for row-by-row evaluations instead of perValueCxt, and use the explicitly created context -- renamed from perValueCxt to perTableCxt -- for arguments and state for each individual table-generation operation. Backpatch to PG10 where this code was introduced. Original report by IRC user begriffs; analysis and patch by me. Reviewed by Tom Lane and Pavel Stehule. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/153394403528.10284.7530399040974170549@wrigleys.postgresql.org
2018-08-03Fix buffer usage stats for parallel nodes.Amit Kapila
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
2018-08-03Match the buffer usage tracking for leader and worker backends.Amit Kapila
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
2018-07-19Rephrase a few comments for clarity.Heikki Linnakangas
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
2018-07-18Fix misc typos, mostly in comments.Heikki Linnakangas
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.
2018-06-27Fix thinko in comments.Amit Kapila
A slot can not be stored in a tuple but it's vice versa. Reported-by: Ashutosh Bapat Author: Ashutosh Bapat Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFjFpRcHhNhXdegyJv3KKDWrwO1_NB_KYZM_ZSDeMOZaL1A5jQ@mail.gmail.com
2018-06-08Fix typoPeter Eisentraut
2018-06-07Fix obsolete comment.Heikki Linnakangas
The 'orig_slot' argument was removed in commit c0a8ae7be392, but that commit forgot to update the comment. Author: Amit Langote Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/194ac4bf-7b4a-c887-bf26-bc1a85ea995a@lab.ntt.co.jp