summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/backend/executor
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2023-11-23Fix resource leak when a FDW's ForeignAsyncRequest function failsHeikki Linnakangas
If an error is thrown after calling CreateWaitEventSet(), the memory of a WaitEventSet is free'd as it's allocated in the short-lived memory context, but the file descriptor (on epoll- or kqueue-based systems) or handles (on Windows) that it contains are leaked. Use PG_TRY-FINALLY to ensure it gets freed. (On master, I will apply a better fix, using ResourceOwners to track the WaitEventSet, but that's not backpatchable.) The added test doesn't check for leaking resources, so it passed even before this commit. But at least it covers the code path. In the passing, fix misleading comment on what the 'nevents' argument to WaitEventSetWait means. Report by Alexander Lakhin, analysis and suggestion for the fix by Tom Lane. Fixes bug #17828. Backpatch to v14 where async execution was introduced, but master gets a different fix. Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/17828-122da8cba23236be@postgresql.org Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/472235.1678387869@sss.pgh.pa.us
2023-11-09Fix AFTER ROW trigger execution in MERGE cross-partition update.Dean Rasheed
When executing a MERGE UPDATE action, if the UPDATE is turned into a cross-partition DELETE then INSERT, do not attempt to invoke AFTER UPDATE ROW triggers, or any of the other post-update actions in ExecUpdateEpilogue(). For consistency with a plain UPDATE command, such triggers should not be fired (and typically fail anyway), and similarly, other post-update actions, such as WCO/RLS checks should not be executed, and might also lead to unexpected failures. Therefore, as with ExecUpdate(), make ExecMergeMatched() return immediately if ExecUpdateAct() reports that a cross-partition update was done, to be sure that no further processing is done for that tuple. Back-patch to v15, where MERGE was introduced. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCWjBgagyNZs02vgDF0DvASYj-iHTFtXG2-nP3orZhmtcw%40mail.gmail.com
2023-10-28Fix intra-query memory leak when a SRF returns zero rows.Tom Lane
When looping around after finding that the set-returning function returned zero rows for the current input tuple, ExecProjectSet neglected to reset either of the two memory contexts it's responsible for cleaning out. Typically this wouldn't cause much problem, because once the SRF does return at least one row, the contexts would get reset on the next call. However, if the SRF returns no rows for many input tuples in succession, quite a lot of memory could be transiently consumed. To fix, make sure we reset both contexts while looping around. Per bug #18172 from Sergei Kornilov. Back-patch to all supported branches. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18172-9b8c5fc1d676ded3@postgresql.org
2023-10-24Fix problems when a plain-inheritance parent table is excluded.Tom Lane
When an UPDATE/DELETE/MERGE's target table is an old-style inheritance tree, it's possible for the parent to get excluded from the plan while some children are not. (I believe this is only possible if we can prove that a CHECK ... NO INHERIT constraint on the parent contradicts the query WHERE clause, so it's a very unusual case.) In such a case, ExecInitModifyTable mistakenly concluded that the first surviving child is the target table, leading to at least two bugs: 1. The wrong table's statement-level triggers would get fired. 2. In v16 and up, it was possible to fail with "invalid perminfoindex 0 in RTE with relid nnnn" due to the child RTE not having permissions data included in the query plan. This was hard to reproduce reliably because it did not occur unless the update triggered some non-HOT index updates. In v14 and up, this is easy to fix by defining ModifyTable.rootRelation to be the parent RTE in plain inheritance as well as partitioned cases. While the wrong-triggers bug also appears in older branches, the relevant code in both the planner and executor is quite a bit different, so it would take a good deal of effort to develop and test a suitable patch. Given the lack of field complaints about the trigger issue, I'll desist for now. (Patching v11 for this seems unwise anyway, given that it will have no more releases after next month.) Per bug #18147 from Hans Buschmann. Amit Langote and Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18147-6fc796538913ee88@postgresql.org
2023-10-13Fix runtime partition pruning for HASH partitioned tablesDavid Rowley
This could only affect HASH partitioned tables with at least 2 partition key columns. If partition pruning was delayed until execution and the query contained an IS NULL qual on one of the partitioned keys, and some subsequent partitioned key was being compared to a non-Const, then this could result in a crash due to the incorrect keyno being used to calculate the stateidx for the expression evaluation code. Here we fix this by properly skipping partitioned keys which have a nullkey set. Effectively, this must be the same as what's going on inside perform_pruning_base_step(). Sergei Glukhov also provided a patch, but that's not what's being used here. Reported-by: Sergei Glukhov Reviewed-by: tender wang, Sergei Glukhov Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/d05b26fa-af54-27e1-f693-6c31590802fa@postgrespro.ru Backpatch-through: 11, where runtime partition pruning was added.
2023-10-05Fix memory leak in Memoize codeDavid Rowley
Ensure we switch to the per-tuple memory context to prevent any memory leaks of detoasted Datums in MemoizeHash_hash() and MemoizeHash_equal(). Reported-by: Orlov Aleksej Author: Orlov Aleksej, David Rowley Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/83281eed63c74e4f940317186372abfd%40cft.ru Backpatch-through: 14, where Memoize was added
2023-09-30Fix EvalPlanQual rechecking during MERGE.Dean Rasheed
Under some circumstances, concurrent MERGE operations could lead to inconsistent results, that varied according the plan chosen. This was caused by a lack of rowmarks on the source relation, which meant that EvalPlanQual rechecking was not guaranteed to return the same source tuples when re-running the join query. Fix by ensuring that preprocess_rowmarks() sets up PlanRowMarks for all non-target relations used in MERGE, in the same way that it does for UPDATE and DELETE. Per bug #18103. Back-patch to v15, where MERGE was introduced. Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Richard Guo. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18103-c4386baab8e355e3%40postgresql.org
2023-08-07Fix RLS policy usage in MERGE.Dean Rasheed
If MERGE executes an UPDATE action on a table with row-level security, the code incorrectly applied the WITH CHECK clauses from the target table's INSERT policies to new rows, instead of the clauses from the table's UPDATE policies. In addition, it failed to check new rows against the target table's SELECT policies, if SELECT permissions were required (likely to always be the case). In addition, if MERGE executes a DO NOTHING action for matched rows, the code incorrectly applied the USING clauses from the target table's DELETE policies to existing target tuples. These policies were applied as checks that would throw an error, if they did not pass. Fix this, so that a MERGE UPDATE action applies the same RLS policies as a plain UPDATE query with a WHERE clause, and a DO NOTHING action does not apply any RLS checks (other than adding clauses from SELECT policies to the join). Back-patch to v15, where MERGE was introduced. Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Stephen Frost. Security: CVE-2023-39418
2023-07-02Fix memory leak in Incremental Sort rescansTomas Vondra
The Incremental Sort had a couple issues, resulting in leaking memory during rescans, possibly triggering OOM. The code had a couple of related flaws: 1. During rescans, the sort states were reset but then also set to NULL (despite the comment saying otherwise). ExecIncrementalSort then sees NULL and initializes a new sort state, leaking the memory used by the old one. 2. Initializing the sort state also automatically rebuilt the info about presorted keys, leaking the already initialized info. presorted_keys was also unnecessarily reset to NULL. Patch by James Coleman, based on patches by Laurenz Albe and Tom Lane. Backpatch to 13, where Incremental Sort was introduced. Author: James Coleman, Laurenz Albe, Tom Lane Reported-by: Laurenz Albe, Zu-Ming Jiang Backpatch-through: 13 Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/b2bd02dff61af15e3526293e2771f874cf2a3be7.camel%40cybertec.at Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/db03c582-086d-e7cd-d4a1-3bc722f81765%40inf.ethz.ch
2023-06-29Fix order of operations in ExecEvalFieldStoreDeForm().Tom Lane
If the given composite datum is toasted out-of-line, DatumGetHeapTupleHeader will perform database accesses to detoast it. That can invalidate the result of get_cached_rowtype, as documented (perhaps not plainly enough) in that function's API spec; which leads to strange errors or crashes when we try to use the TupleDesc to read the tuple. In short then, trying to update a field of a composite column could fail intermittently if the overall column value is wide enough to require toasting. We can fix the bug at no cost by just changing the order of operations, since we don't need the TupleDesc until after detoasting. (Other callers of get_cached_rowtype appear to get this right already, so there's only one bug.) Note that the added regression test case reveals this bug reliably only with debug_discard_caches/CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS. Per bug #17994 from Alexander Lakhin. Sadly, this patch does not fix the missing-values issue revealed in the bug discussion; we'll need some more work to cover that. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17994-5c7100b51b4790e9@postgresql.org
2023-06-07Use per-tuple context in ExecGetAllUpdatedColsTomas Vondra
Commit fc22b6623b (generated columns) replaced ExecGetUpdatedCols() with ExecGetAllUpdatedCols() in a couple places handling UPDATE (triggers and lock mode). However, ExecGetUpdatedCols() did exec_rt_fetch() while ExecGetAllUpdatedCols() also allocates memory through bms_union() without paying attention to the memory context and happened to use the long-lived ExecutorState, leaking the memory until the end of the query. The amount of leaked memory is proportional to the number of (updated) attributes, types of UPDATE triggers, and the number of processed rows (which for UPDATE ... FROM ... may be much higher than updated rows). Fixed by switching to the per-tuple context in GetAllUpdatedColumns(). This is fine for all in-core callers, but external callers may need to copy the result. But we're not aware of any such callers. Note the issue was introduced by fc22b6623b, but the macros were later renamed by f50e888990. Backpatch to 12, where the issue was introduced. Reported-by: Tomas Vondra Reviewed-by: Andres Freund, Tom Lane, Jakub Wartak Backpatch-through: 12 Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/222a3442-7f7d-246c-ed9b-a76209d19239@enterprisedb.com
2023-05-19Fix misbehavior of EvalPlanQual checks with multiple result relations.Tom Lane
The idea of EvalPlanQual is that we replace the query's scan of the result relation with a single injected tuple, and see if we get a tuple out, thereby implying that the injected tuple still passes the query quals. (In join cases, other relations in the query are still scanned normally.) This logic was not updated when commit 86dc90056 made it possible for a single DML query plan to have multiple result relations, when the query target relation has inheritance or partition children. We replaced the output for the current result relation successfully, but other result relations were still scanned normally; thus, if any other result relation contained a tuple satisfying the quals, we'd think the EPQ check passed, even if it did not pass for the injected tuple itself. This would lead to update or delete actions getting performed when they should have been skipped due to a conflicting concurrent update in READ COMMITTED isolation mode. Fix by blocking all sibling result relations from emitting tuples during an EvalPlanQual recheck. In the back branches, the fix is complicated a bit by the need to not change the size of struct EPQState (else we'd have ABI-breaking changes in offsets in struct ModifyTableState). Like the back-patches of 3f7836ff6 and 4b3e37993, add a separately palloc'd struct to avoid that. The logic is the same as in HEAD otherwise. This is only a live bug back to v14 where 86dc90056 came in. However, I chose to back-patch the test cases further, on the grounds that this whole area is none too well tested. I skipped doing so in v11 though because none of the test applied cleanly, and it didn't quite seem worth extra work for a branch with only six months to live. Per report from Ante Krešić (via Aleksander Alekseev) Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJ7c6TMBTN3rcz4=AjYhLPD_w3FFT0Wq_C15jxCDn8U4tZnH1g@mail.gmail.com
2023-05-16Mark internal messages as no longer translatableAlvaro Herrera
The problem that these messages protect against can only occur because a corrupted hash spill file was written, i.e., a Postgres bug. There's no reason to have them as translatable. Backpatch to 15, where these messages were changed by commit c4649cce39a4. Reviewed-by: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20230510175407.dwa5v477pw62ikyx@alvherre.pgsql
2023-04-25Fix buffer refcount leak with FDW bulk insertsMichael Paquier
The leak would show up when using batch inserts with foreign tables included in a partition tree, as the slots used in the batch were not reset once processed. In order to fix this problem, some ExecClearTuple() are added to clean up the slots used once a batch is filled and processed, mapping with the number of slots currently in use as tracked by the counter ri_NumSlots. This buffer refcount leak has been introduced in b676ac4 with the addition of the executor facility to improve bulk inserts for FDWs, so backpatch down to 14. Alexander has provided the patch (slightly modified by me). The test for postgres_fdw comes from me, based on the test case that the author has sent in the report. Author: Alexander Pyhalov Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/b035780a740efd38dc30790c76927255@postgrespro.ru Backpatch-through: 14
2023-04-15Fix assignment to array of domain over composite, redux.Tom Lane
Commit 3e310d837 taught isAssignmentIndirectionExpr() to look through CoerceToDomain nodes. That's not sufficient, because since commit 04fe805a1 it's been possible for the planner to simplify CoerceToDomain to RelabelType when the domain has no constraints to enforce. So we need to look through RelabelType too. Per bug #17897 from Alexander Lakhin. Although 3e310d837 was back-patched to v11, it seems sufficient to apply this change to v12 and later, since 04fe805a1 came in in v12. Dmitry Dolgov Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17897-4216c546c3874044@postgresql.org
2023-03-26Fix oversights in array manipulation.Tom Lane
The nested-arrays code path in ExecEvalArrayExpr() used palloc to allocate the result array, whereas every other array-creating function has used palloc0 since 18c0b4ecc. This mostly works, but unused bits past the end of the nulls bitmap may end up undefined. That causes valgrind complaints with -DWRITE_READ_PARSE_PLAN_TREES, and could cause planner misbehavior as cited in 18c0b4ecc. There seems no very good reason why we should strive to avoid palloc0 in just this one case, so fix it the easy way with s/palloc/palloc0/. While looking at that I noted that we also failed to check for overflow of "nbytes" and "nitems" while summing the sizes of the sub-arrays, potentially allowing a crash due to undersized output allocation. For "nbytes", follow the policy used by other array-munging code of checking for overflow after each addition. (As elsewhere, the last addition of the array's overhead space doesn't need an extra check, since palloc itself will catch a value between 1Gb and 2Gb.) For "nitems", there's no very good reason to sum the inputs at all, since we can perfectly well use ArrayGetNItems' result instead of ignoring it. Per discussion of this bug, also remove redundant zeroing of the nulls bitmap in array_set_element and array_set_slice. Patch by Alexander Lakhin and myself, per bug #17858 from Alexander Lakhin; thanks also to Richard Guo. These bugs are a dozen years old, so back-patch to all supported branches. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17858-8fd287fd3663d051@postgresql.org
2023-03-23Ignore generated columns during apply of update/delete.Amit Kapila
We fail to apply updates and deletes when the REPLICA IDENTITY FULL is used for the table having generated columns. We didn't use to ignore generated columns while doing tuple comparison among the tuples from the publisher and subscriber during apply of updates and deletes. Author: Onder Kalaci Reviewed-by: Shi yu, Amit Kapila Backpatch-through: 12 Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CACawEhVQC9WoofunvXg12aXtbqKnEgWxoRx3+v8q32AWYsdpGg@mail.gmail.com
2023-03-21Ignore dropped columns during apply of update/delete.Amit Kapila
We fail to apply updates and deletes when the REPLICA IDENTITY FULL is used for the table having dropped columns. We didn't use to ignore dropped columns while doing tuple comparison among the tuples from the publisher and subscriber during apply of updates and deletes. Author: Onder Kalaci, Shi yu Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CACawEhVQC9WoofunvXg12aXtbqKnEgWxoRx3+v8q32AWYsdpGg@mail.gmail.com
2023-03-21Fix race in parallel hash join batch cleanup, take II.Thomas Munro
With unlucky timing and parallel_leader_participation=off (not the default), PHJ could attempt to access per-batch shared state just as it was being freed. There was code intended to prevent that by checking for a cleared pointer, but it was racy. Fix, by introducing an extra barrier phase. The new phase PHJ_BUILD_RUNNING means that it's safe to access the per-batch state to find a batch to help with, and PHJ_BUILD_DONE means that it is too late. The last to detach will free the array of per-batch state as before, but now it will also atomically advance the phase, so that late attachers can avoid the hazard. This mirrors the way per-batch hash tables are freed (see phases PHJ_BATCH_PROBING and PHJ_BATCH_DONE). An earlier attempt to fix this (commit 3b8981b6, later reverted) missed one special case. When the inner side is empty (the "empty inner optimization), the build barrier would only make it to PHJ_BUILD_HASHING_INNER phase before workers attempted to detach from the hashtable. In that case, fast-forward the build barrier to PHJ_BUILD_RUNNING before proceeding, so that our later assertions hold and we can still negotiate who is cleaning up. Revealed by build farm failures, where BarrierAttach() failed a sanity check assertion, because the memory had been clobbered by dsa_free(). In non-assert builds, the result could be a segmentation fault. Back-patch to all supported releases. Author: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> Author: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com> Reported-by: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> Reported-by: David Geier <geidav.pg@gmail.com> Tested-by: David Geier <geidav.pg@gmail.com> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200929061142.GA29096%40paquier.xyz
2023-03-20Fix memory leak in Memoize cache key evaluationDavid Rowley
When probing the Memoize cache to check if the current cache key values exist in the cache, we perform an evaluation of the expressions making up the cache key before probing the hash table for those values. This operation could leak memory as it is possible that the cache key is an expression which requires allocation of memory, as was the case in bug 17844. Here we fix this by correctly switching to the per tuple context before evaluating the cache expressions so that the memory is freed next time the per tuple context is reset. Bug: 17844 Reported-by: Alexey Ermakov Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17844-d2f6f9e75a622bed@postgresql.org Backpatch-through: 14, where Memoize was introduced
2023-03-13Fix MERGE command tag for actions blocked by BEFORE ROW triggers.Dean Rasheed
This ensures that the row count in the command tag for a MERGE is correctly computed in the case where UPDATEs or DELETEs are skipped due to a BEFORE ROW trigger returning NULL (the INSERT case was already handled correctly by ExecMergeNotMatched() calling ExecInsert()). Back-patch to v15, where MERGE was introduced. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCU8XEmR0JWKDtyb7iZ%3DqCffxS9uyJt0iOZ4TV4RT%2Bow1w%40mail.gmail.com
2023-03-13Fix concurrent update issues with MERGE.Dean Rasheed
If MERGE attempts an UPDATE or DELETE on a table with BEFORE ROW triggers, or a cross-partition UPDATE (with or without triggers), and a concurrent UPDATE or DELETE happens, the merge code would fail. In some cases this would lead to a crash, while in others it would cause the wrong merge action to be executed, or no action at all. The immediate cause of the crash was the trigger code calling ExecGetUpdateNewTuple() as part of the EPQ mechanism, which fails because during a merge ri_projectNew is NULL, since merge has its own per-action projection information, which ExecGetUpdateNewTuple() knows nothing about. Fix by arranging for the trigger code to exit early, returning the TM_Result and TM_FailureData information, if a concurrent modification is detected, allowing the merge code to do the necessary EPQ handling in its own way. Similarly, prevent the cross-partition update code from doing any EPQ processing for a merge, allowing the merge code to work out what it needs to do. This leads to a number of simplifications in nodeModifyTable.c. Most notably, the ModifyTableContext->GetUpdateNewTuple() callback is no longer needed, and mergeGetUpdateNewTuple() can be deleted, since there is no longer any requirement for get-update-new-tuple during a merge. Similarly, ModifyTableContext->cpUpdateRetrySlot is no longer needed. Thus ExecGetUpdateNewTuple() and the retry_slot handling of ExecCrossPartitionUpdate() can be restored to how they were in v14, before the merge code was added, and ExecMergeMatched() no longer needs any special-case handling for cross-partition updates. While at it, tidy up ExecUpdateEpilogue() a bit, making it handle recheckIndexes locally, rather than passing it in as a parameter, ensuring that it is freed properly. This dates back to when it was split off from ExecUpdate() to support merge. Per bug #17809 from Alexander Lakhin, and follow-up investigation of bug #17792, also from Alexander Lakhin. Back-patch to v15, where MERGE was introduced, taking care to preserve backwards-compatibility of the trigger API in v15 for any extensions that might use it. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17809-9e6650bef133f0fe%40postgresql.org https://postgr.es/m/17792-0f89452029662c36%40postgresql.org
2023-03-06Fix some more cases of missed GENERATED-column updates.Tom Lane
If UPDATE is forced to retry after an EvalPlanQual check, it neglected to repeat GENERATED-column computations, even though those might well have changed since we're dealing with a different tuple than before. Fixing this is mostly a matter of looping back a bit further when we retry. In v15 and HEAD that's most easily done by altering the API of ExecUpdateAct so that it includes computing GENERATED expressions. Also, if an UPDATE in a partitioned table turns into a cross-partition INSERT operation, we failed to recompute GENERATED columns. That's a bug since 8bf6ec3ba allowed partitions to have different generation expressions; although it seems to have no ill effects before that. Fixing this is messier because we can now have situations where the same query needs both the UPDATE-aligned set of GENERATED columns and the INSERT-aligned set, and it's unclear which set will be generated first (else we could hack things by forcing the INSERT-aligned set to be generated, which is indeed how fe9e658f4 made it work for MERGE). The best fix seems to be to build and store separate sets of expressions for the INSERT and UPDATE cases. That would create ABI issues in the back branches, but so far it seems we can leave this alone in the back branches. Per bug #17823 from Hisahiro Kauchi. The first part of this affects all branches back to v12 where GENERATED columns were added. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17823-b64909cf7d63de84@postgresql.org
2023-02-25Fix MULTIEXPR_SUBLINK with partitioned target tables, yet again.Tom Lane
We already tried to fix this in commits 3f7323cbb et al (and follow-on fixes), but now it emerges that there are still unfixed cases; moreover, these cases affect all branches not only pre-v14. I thought we had eliminated all cases of making multiple clones of an UPDATE's target list when we nuked inheritance_planner. But it turns out we still do that in some partitioned-UPDATE cases, notably including INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE, because ExecInitPartitionInfo thinks it's okay to clone and modify the parent's targetlist. This fix is based on a suggestion from Andres Freund: let's stop abusing the ParamExecData.execPlan mechanism, which was only ever meant to handle initplans, and instead solve the execution timing problem by having the expression compiler move MULTIEXPR_SUBLINK steps to the front of their expression step lists. This is feasible because (a) all branches still in support compile the entire targetlist of an UPDATE into a single ExprState, and (b) we know that all MULTIEXPR_SUBLINKs do need to be evaluated --- none could be buried inside a CASE, for example. There is a minor semantics change concerning the order of execution of the MULTIEXPR's subquery versus other parts of the parent targetlist, but that seems like something we can get away with. By doing that, we no longer need to worry about whether different clones of a MULTIEXPR_SUBLINK share output Params; their usage of that data structure won't overlap. Per bug #17800 from Alexander Lakhin. Back-patch to all supported branches. In v13 and earlier, we can revert 3f7323cbb and follow-on fixes; however, I chose to keep the SubPlan.subLinkId field added in ccbb54c72. We don't need that anymore in the core code, but it's cheap enough to fill, and removing a plan node field in a minor release seems like it'd be asking for trouble. Andres Freund and Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17800-ff90866b3906c964@postgresql.org
2023-02-22Add missing support for the latest SPI status codes.Dean Rasheed
SPI_result_code_string() was missing support for SPI_OK_TD_REGISTER, and in v15 and later, it was missing support for SPI_OK_MERGE, as was pltcl_process_SPI_result(). The last of those would trigger an error if a MERGE was executed from PL/Tcl. The others seem fairly innocuous, but worth fixing. Back-patch to all supported branches. Before v15, this is just adding SPI_OK_TD_REGISTER to SPI_result_code_string(), which is unlikely to be seen by anyone, but seems worth doing for completeness. Reviewed by Tom Lane. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCUg8V%2BK%2BGcafOPqymxk84Y_prXgfe64PDoopjLFH6Z0Aw%40mail.gmail.com https://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCUMe%2B_KedPMM9AxKqm%3DSZogSxjUcrMe%2BsakusZh3BFcQw%40mail.gmail.com
2023-02-22Fix Assert failure for MERGE into a partitioned table with RLS.Dean Rasheed
In ExecInitPartitionInfo(), the Assert when building the WITH CHECK OPTION list for the new partition assumed that the command would be an INSERT or UPDATE, but it can also be a MERGE. This can be triggered by a MERGE into a partitioned table with RLS checks to enforce. Fix, and back-patch to v15, where MERGE was introduced. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCWWFtQmW67F3XTyMU5Am10Oxa_b8oe0x%2BNu5Mo%2BCdRErg%40mail.gmail.com
2023-02-22Fix MERGE command tag for cross-partition updates.Dean Rasheed
This ensures that the row count in the command tag for a MERGE is correctly computed. Previously, if MERGE updated a partitioned table, the row count would be incorrect if any row was moved to a different partition, since such updates were counted twice. Back-patch to v15, where MERGE was introduced. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCWRMG7XX2QEsVL1LswmNo2d_YG8tKTLkpD3=Lp644S7rg@mail.gmail.com
2023-02-15Don't rely on uninitialized value in MERGE / DELETEAlvaro Herrera
On MERGE / WHEN MATCHED DELETE it's not possible to get cross-partition updates, so we don't initialize cpUpdateRetrySlot; however, the code was not careful to ignore the value in that case. Make it do so. Backpatch to 15. Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17792-0f89452029662c36@postgresql.org
2023-02-13Disable WindowAgg inverse transitions when subplans are presentDavid Rowley
When an aggregate function is used as a WindowFunc and a tuple transitions out of the window frame, we ordinarily try to make use of the aggregate function's inverse transition function to "unaggregate" the exiting tuple. This optimization is disabled for various cases, including when the aggregate contains a volatile function. In such a case we'd be unable to ensure that the transition value was calculated to the same value during transitions and inverse transitions. Unfortunately, we did this check by calling contain_volatile_functions() which does not recursively search SubPlans for volatile functions. If the aggregate function's arguments or its FILTER clause contained a subplan with volatile functions then we'd fail to notice this. Here we fix this by just disabling the optimization when the WindowFunc contains any subplans. Volatile functions are not the only reason that a subplan may have nonrepeatable results. Bug: #17777 Reported-by: Anban Company Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17777-860b739b6efde977%40postgresql.org Reviewed-by: Tom Lane Backpatch-through: 11
2023-01-30Ensure that MERGE recomputes GENERATED expressions properly.Dean Rasheed
This fixes a bug that, under some circumstances, would cause MERGE to fail to properly recompute expressions for GENERATED STORED columns. Formerly, ExecInitModifyTable() did not call ExecInitStoredGenerated() for a MERGE command, which meant that the generated expressions information was not computed until later, when the first merge action was executed. However, if the first merge action to execute was an UPDATE, then ExecInitStoredGenerated() could decide to skip some some generated columns, if the columns on which they depended were not updated, which was a problem if the MERGE also contained an INSERT action, for which no generated columns should be skipped. So fix by having ExecInitModifyTable() call ExecInitStoredGenerated() for MERGE, and assume that it isn't safe to skip any generated columns in a MERGE. Possibly that could be relaxed, by allowing some generated columns to be skipped for a MERGE without an INSERT action, but it's not clear that it's worth the effort. Noticed while investigating bug #17759. Back-patch to v15, where MERGE was added. Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Tom Lane. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17759-e76d9bece1b5421c%40postgresql.org https://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCXb_ezoMCcL0tzKwRGA1x0oeE%3DawTaysRfTPq%2B3wNJn8g%40mail.gmail.com
2023-01-15Make new GENERATED-expressions code more bulletproof.Tom Lane
In commit 8bf6ec3ba I assumed that no code path could reach ExecGetExtraUpdatedCols without having gone through ExecInitStoredGenerated. That turns out not to be the case in logical replication: if there's an ON UPDATE trigger on the target table, trigger.c will call this code before anybody has set up its generated columns. Having seen that, I don't have a lot of faith in there not being other such paths. ExecGetExtraUpdatedCols can call ExecInitStoredGenerated for itself, as long as we are willing to assume that it is only called in CMD_UPDATE operations, which on the whole seems like a safer leap of faith. Per report from Vitaly Davydov. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/d259d69652b8c2ff50e14cda3c236c7f@postgrespro.ru
2023-01-05Fix calculation of which GENERATED columns need to be updated.Tom Lane
We were identifying the updatable generated columns of inheritance children by transposing the calculation made for their parent. However, there's nothing that says a traditional-inheritance child can't have generated columns that aren't there in its parent, or that have different dependencies than are in the parent's expression. (At present it seems that we don't enforce that for partitioning either, which is likely wrong to some degree or other; but the case clearly needs to be handled with traditional inheritance.) Hence, drop the very-klugy-anyway "extraUpdatedCols" RTE field in favor of identifying which generated columns depend on updated columns during executor startup. In HEAD we can remove extraUpdatedCols altogether; in back branches, it's still there but always empty. Another difference between the HEAD and back-branch versions of this patch is that in HEAD we can add the new bitmap field to ResultRelInfo, but that would cause an ABI break in back branches. Like 4b3e37993, add a List field at the end of struct EState instead. Back-patch to v13. The bogus calculation is also being made in v12, but it doesn't have the same visible effect because we don't use it to decide which generated columns to recalculate; as a consequence of which the patch doesn't apply easily. I think that there might still be a demonstrable bug associated with trigger firing conditions, but that's such a weird corner-case usage that I'm content to leave it unfixed in v12. Amit Langote and Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqFshLKNvQUd1DgwJ-7tsTp=dwv7KZqXC4j2wYBV1aCDUA@mail.gmail.com Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2793383.1672944799@sss.pgh.pa.us
2023-01-02Avoid reference to nonexistent array element in ExecInitAgg().Tom Lane
When considering an empty grouping set, we fetched phasedata->eqfunctions[-1]. Because the eqfunctions array is palloc'd, that would always be an aset pointer in released versions, and thus the code accidentally failed to malfunction (since it would do nothing unless it found a null pointer). Nonetheless this seems like trouble waiting to happen, so add a check for length == 0. It's depressing that our valgrind testing did not catch this. Maybe we should reconsider the choice to not mark that word NOACCESS? Richard Guo Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMbWs4-vZuuPOZsKOYnSAaPYGKhmacxhki+vpOKk0O7rymccXQ@mail.gmail.com
2022-12-08Remove new structure member from ResultRelInfo.Etsuro Fujita
In commit ffbb7e65a, I added a ModifyTableState member to ResultRelInfo to save the owning ModifyTableState for use by nodeModifyTable.c when performing batch inserts, but as pointed out by Tom Lane, that changed the array stride of es_result_relations, and that would break any previously-compiled extension code that accesses that array. Fix by removing that member from ResultRelInfo and instead adding a List member at the end of EState to save such ModifyTableStates. Per report from Tom Lane. Back-patch to v14, like the previous commit; I chose to apply the patch to HEAD as well, to make back-patching easy. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/4065383.1669395453%40sss.pgh.pa.us
2022-12-07Fix 32-bit build dangling pointer issue in WindowAggDavid Rowley
9d9c02ccd added window "run conditions", which allows the evaluation of monotonic window functions to be skipped when the run condition is no longer true. Prior to this commit, once the run condition was no longer true and we stopped evaluating the window functions, we simply just left the ecxt_aggvalues[] and ecxt_aggnulls[] arrays alone to store whatever value was stored there the last time the window function was evaluated. Leaving a stale value in there isn't really a problem on 64-bit builds as all of the window functions which we recognize as monotonic all return int8, which is passed by value on 64-bit builds. However, on 32-bit builds, this was a problem as the value stored in the ecxt_values[] element would be a by-ref value and it would be pointing to some memory which would get reset once the tuple context is destroyed. Since the WindowAgg node will output these values in the resulting tupleslot, this could be problematic for the top-level WindowAgg node which must look at these values to filter out the rows that don't meet its filter condition. Here we fix this by just zeroing the ecxt_aggvalues[] and setting the ecxt_aggnulls[] array to true when the run condition first becomes false. This results in the WindowAgg's output having NULLs for the WindowFunc's columns rather than the stale or pointer pointing to possibly freed memory. These tuples with the NULLs can only make it as far as the top-level WindowAgg node before they're filtered out. To ensure that these tuples *are* always filtered out, we now insist that OpExprs making up the run condition are strict OpExprs. Currently, all the window functions which the planner recognizes as monotonic return INT8 and the operator which is used for the run condition must be a member of a btree opclass. In reality, these restrictions exclude nothing that's built-in to Postgres and are unlikely to exclude anyone's custom operators due to the requirement that the operator is part of a btree opclass. It would be unusual if those were not strict. Reported-by: Sergey Shinderuk, using valgrind Reviewed-by: Richard Guo, Sergey Shinderuk Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/29184c50-429a-ebd7-f1fb-0589c6723a35@postgrespro.ru Backpatch-through: 15, where 9d9c02ccd was added
2022-11-29Prevent clobbering of utility statements in SQL function caches.Tom Lane
This is an oversight in commit 7c337b6b5: I apparently didn't think about the possibility of a SQL function being executed multiple times within a query. In that case, functions.c's primitive caching mechanism allows the same utility parse tree to be presented for execution more than once. We have to tell ProcessUtility to make a working copy of the parse tree, or bad things happen. Normally I'd add a regression test, but I think the reported crasher is dependent on some rather random implementation choices that are nowhere near functions.c, so its usefulness as a long-lived test feels questionable. In any case, this fix is clearly correct given the design choices of 7c337b6b5. Per bug #17702 from Xin Wen. Thanks to Daniel Gustafsson for analysis. Back-patch to v14 where the faulty commit came in (before that, the responsibility for copying scribble-able utility parse trees lay elsewhere). Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17702-ad24fdcdd1e9047a@postgresql.org
2022-11-25Fix handling of pending inserts in nodeModifyTable.c.Etsuro Fujita
Commit b663a4136, which allowed FDWs to INSERT rows in bulk, added to nodeModifyTable.c code to flush pending inserts to the foreign-table result relation(s) before completing processing of the ModifyTable node, but the code failed to take into account the case where the INSERT query has modifying CTEs, leading to incorrect results. Also, that commit failed to flush pending inserts before firing BEFORE ROW triggers so that rows are visible to such triggers. In that commit we scanned through EState's es_tuple_routing_result_relations or es_opened_result_relations list to find the foreign-table result relations to which pending inserts are flushed, but that would be inefficient in some cases. So to fix, 1) add a List member to EState to record the insert-pending result relations, and 2) modify nodeModifyTable.c so that it adds the foreign-table result relation to the list in ExecInsert() if appropriate, and flushes pending inserts properly using the list where needed. While here, fix a copy-and-pasteo in a comment in ExecBatchInsert(), which was added by that commit. Back-patch to v14 where that commit appeared. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPmGK16qutyCmyJJzgQOhfBq%3DNoGDqTB6O0QBZTihrbqre%2BoxA%40mail.gmail.com
2022-11-17Fix MERGE tuple count with DO NOTHINGAlvaro Herrera
Reporting tuples for which nothing is done is useless and goes against the documented behavior, so don't do it. Backpatch to 15. Reported by: Luca Ferrari Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKoxK+42MmACUh6s8XzASQKizbzrtOGA6G1UjzCP75NcXHsiNw@mail.gmail.com
2022-11-17Fix outdated comment in ExecDeleteAlvaro Herrera
This commend references a struct that disappeared before MERGE was merged ... and ExecDelete is not called by the committed MERGE anyway. Revert to the original wording. Backpatch to 15
2022-11-17doc: Fix wording of MERGE actions in READMEDaniel Gustafsson
UPDATE was listed twice and DELETE was omitted, replace one UPDATE with DELETE instead. Backpatch through v15 where MERGE was added. Author: Myo Wai Thant <myo.waithant@fujitsu.com> Reviewed-by: Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/OSAPR01MB43247E46931E9E9CFC4AA0F29A079@OSAPR01MB4324.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com Backpatch-through: 15
2022-11-02Fix copy-and-pasteo in comment.Etsuro Fujita
2022-09-29Update comment in ExecInsert() regarding batch insertion.Etsuro Fujita
Remove the stale text that is a leftover from an earlier version of the patch to add support for batch insertion, and adjust the wording in the remaining text. Back-patch to v14 where batch insertion came in. Review and wording adjustment by Tom Lane. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPmGK14goatHPHQv2Aeu_UTKqZ%2BBO%2BP%2Bzd3HKv5D%2BdyyfWKDSw%40mail.gmail.com
2022-09-29Restrict Datum sort optimization to byval types onlyDavid Rowley
91e9e89dc modified nodeSort.c so that it used datum sorts when the targetlist of the outer node contained only a single column. That commit failed to recognise that the Datum returned by tuplesort_getdatum() must be pfree'd when the type is a byref type. Ronan Dunklau did originally propose the patch with that restriction, but that, probably through my own fault, got lost during further development work. Due to the timing of this report (PG15 RC1 is almost out the door), let's just restrict the datum sort optimization to apply for byval types only. We might want to look harder into making this work for byref types in PG16. Reported-by: Önder Kalacı Diagnosis-by: Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CACawEhVxe0ufR26UcqtU7GYGRuubq3p6ZWPGXL4cxy_uexpAAQ@mail.gmail.com Backpatch-through: 15, where 91e9e89dc was introduced.
2022-09-24Message style improvementsPeter Eisentraut
2022-09-19Future-proof the recursion inside ExecShutdownNode().Tom Lane
The API contract for planstate_tree_walker() callbacks is that they take a PlanState pointer and a context pointer. Somebody figured they could save a couple lines of code by ignoring that, and passing ExecShutdownNode itself as the walker even though it has but one argument. Somewhat remarkably, we've gotten away with that so far. However, it seems clear that the upcoming C2x standard means to forbid such cases, and compilers that actively break such code likely won't be far behind. So spend the extra few lines of code to do it honestly with a separate walker function. In HEAD, we might as well go further and remove ExecShutdownNode's useless return value. I left that as-is in back branches though, to forestall complaints about ABI breakage. Back-patch, with the thought that this might become of practical importance before our stable branches are all out of service. It doesn't seem to be fixing any live bug on any currently known platform, however. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/208054.1663534665@sss.pgh.pa.us
2022-09-01Revert SQL/JSON featuresAndrew Dunstan
The reverts the following and makes some associated cleanups: commit f79b803dc: Common SQL/JSON clauses commit f4fb45d15: SQL/JSON constructors commit 5f0adec25: Make STRING an unreserved_keyword. commit 33a377608: IS JSON predicate commit 1a36bc9db: SQL/JSON query functions commit 606948b05: SQL JSON functions commit 49082c2cc: RETURNING clause for JSON() and JSON_SCALAR() commit 4e34747c8: JSON_TABLE commit fadb48b00: PLAN clauses for JSON_TABLE commit 2ef6f11b0: Reduce running time of jsonb_sqljson test commit 14d3f24fa: Further improve jsonb_sqljson parallel test commit a6baa4bad: Documentation for SQL/JSON features commit b46bcf7a4: Improve readability of SQL/JSON documentation. commit 112fdb352: Fix finalization for json_objectagg and friends commit fcdb35c32: Fix transformJsonBehavior commit 4cd8717af: Improve a couple of sql/json error messages commit f7a605f63: Small cleanups in SQL/JSON code commit 9c3d25e17: Fix JSON_OBJECTAGG uniquefying bug commit a79153b7a: Claim SQL standard compliance for SQL/JSON features commit a1e7616d6: Rework SQL/JSON documentation commit 8d9f9634e: Fix errors in copyfuncs/equalfuncs support for JSON node types. commit 3c633f32b: Only allow returning string types or bytea from json_serialize commit 67b26703b: expression eval: Fix EEOP_JSON_CONSTRUCTOR and EEOP_JSONEXPR size. The release notes are also adjusted. Backpatch to release 15. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/40d2c882-bcac-19a9-754d-4299e1d87ac7@postgresql.org
2022-08-16Fix replica identity check for a partitioned table.Amit Kapila
The current publisher code checks if UPDATE or DELETE can be executed with the replica identity of the table even if it's a partitioned table. We can skip checking the replica identity for partitioned tables because the operations are actually performed on the leaf partitions (not the partitioned table). Reported-by: Brad Nicholson Author: Hou Zhijie Reviewed-by: Peter Smith, Amit Kapila Backpatch-through: 13 Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMMnM%3D8i5DohH%3DYKzV0_wYuYSYvuOJoL9F5nzXTc%2ByzsG1f6rg%40mail.gmail.com
2022-08-13Avoid misbehavior when hash_table_bytes < bucket_size.Tom Lane
It's possible to reach this case when work_mem is very small and tupsize is (relatively) very large. In that case ExecChooseHashTableSize would get an assertion failure, or with asserts off it'd compute nbuckets = 0, which'd likely cause misbehavior later (I've not checked). To fix, clamp the number of buckets to be at least 1. This is due to faulty conversion of old my_log2() coding in 28d936031. Back-patch to v13, as that was. Zhang Mingli Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/beb64ca0-91e2-44ac-bf4a-7ea36275ec02@Spark
2022-08-10Fix handling of R/W expanded datums that are passed to SQL functions.Tom Lane
fmgr_sql must make expanded-datum arguments read-only, because it's possible that the function body will pass the argument to more than one callee function. If one of those functions takes the datum's R/W property as license to scribble on it, then later callees will see an unexpected value, leading to wrong answers. From a performance standpoint, it'd be nice to skip this in the common case that the argument value is passed to only one callee. However, detecting that seems fairly hard, and certainly not something that I care to attempt in a back-patched bug fix. Per report from Adam Mackler. This has been broken since we invented expanded datums, so back-patch to all supported branches. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/WScDU5qfoZ7PB2gXwNqwGGgDPmWzz08VdydcPFLhOwUKZcdWbblbo-0Lku-qhuEiZoXJ82jpiQU4hOjOcrevYEDeoAvz6nR0IU4IHhXnaCA=@mackler.email Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/187436.1660143060@sss.pgh.pa.us
2022-08-04Fix check_exclusion_or_unique_constraint for UNIQUE NULLS NOT DISTINCT.Tom Lane
Adjusting this function was overlooked in commit 94aa7cc5f. The only visible symptom (so far) is that INSERT ... ON CONFLICT could go into an endless loop when inserting a null that has a conflict. Richard Guo and Tom Lane, per bug #17558 from Andrew Kesper Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17558-3f6599ffcf52fd4a@postgresql.org