| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Such cases will lead to infinite loops, so they're of no practical
value. The numeric variant of generate_series() already threw error
for this, so borrow its message wording.
Per report from Richard Wesley. Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/91B44E7B-68D5-448F-95C8-B4B3B0F5DEAF@duckdblabs.com
|
|
The planner needs to treat GroupingFunc like Aggref for many purposes,
in particular with respect to processing of the argument expressions,
which are not to be evaluated at runtime. A few places hadn't gotten
that memo, notably including subselect.c's processing of outer-level
aggregates. This resulted in assertion failures or wrong plans for
cases in which a GROUPING() construct references an outer aggregation
level.
Also fix missing special cases for GroupingFunc in cost_qual_eval
(resulting in wrong cost estimates for GROUPING(), although it's
not clear that that would affect plan shapes in practice) and in
ruleutils.c (resulting in excess parentheses in pretty-print mode).
Per bug #17088 from Yaoguang Chen. Back-patch to all supported
branches.
Richard Guo, Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17088-e33882b387de7f5c@postgresql.org
|
|
The output of table_to_xmlschema() and allied functions includes
a regex describing valid values for these types ... but the regex
was itself invalid, as it failed to escape a literal "+" sign.
Report and fix by Renan Soares Lopes. Back-patch to all
supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/7f6fabaa-3f8f-49ab-89ca-59fbfe633105@me.com
|
|
Most of these are cases where we could call memcpy() or other libc
functions with a NULL pointer and a zero count, which is forbidden
by POSIX even though every production version of libc allows it.
We've fixed such things before in a piecemeal way, but apparently
never made an effort to try to get them all. I don't claim that
this patch does so either, but it gets every failure I observe in
check-world, using clang 12.0.1 on current RHEL8.
numeric.c has a different issue that the sanitizer doesn't like:
"ln(-1.0)" will compute log10(0) and then try to assign the
resulting -Inf to an integer variable. We don't actually use the
result in such a case, so there's no live bug.
Back-patch to all supported branches, with the idea that we might
start running a buildfarm member that tests this case. This includes
back-patching c1132aae3 (Check the size in COPY_POINTER_FIELD),
which previously silenced some of these issues in copyfuncs.c.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CALNJ-vT9r0DSsAOw9OXVJFxLENoVS_68kJ5x0p44atoYH+H4dg@mail.gmail.com
|
|
Commit 8431e296ea reworked ProcArrayApplyRecoveryInfo to sort XIDs
before adding them to KnownAssignedXids. But the XIDs are sorted using
xidComparator, which compares the XIDs simply as uint32 values, not
logically. KnownAssignedXidsAdd() however expects XIDs in logical order,
and calls TransactionIdFollowsOrEquals() to enforce that. If there are
XIDs for which the two orderings disagree, an error is raised and the
recovery fails/restarts.
Hitting this issue is fairly easy - you just need two transactions, one
started before the 4B limit (e.g. XID 4294967290), the other sometime
after it (e.g. XID 1000). Logically (4294967290 <= 1000) but when
compared using xidComparator we try to add them in the opposite order.
Which makes KnownAssignedXidsAdd() fail with an error like this:
ERROR: out-of-order XID insertion in KnownAssignedXids
This only happens during replica startup, while processing RUNNING_XACTS
records to build the snapshot. Once we reach STANDBY_SNAPSHOT_READY, we
skip these records. So this does not affect already running replicas,
but if you restart (or create) a replica while there are transactions
with XIDs for which the two orderings disagree, you may hit this.
Long-running transactions and frequent replica restarts increase the
likelihood of hitting this issue. Once the replica gets into this state,
it can't be started (even if the old transactions are terminated).
Fixed by sorting the XIDs logically - this is fine because we're dealing
with normal XIDs (because it's XIDs assigned to backends) and from the
same wraparound epoch (otherwise the backends could not be running at
the same time on the primary node). So there are no problems with the
triangle inequality, which is why xidComparator compares raw values.
Investigation and root cause analysis by Abhijit Menon-Sen. Patch by me.
This issue is present in all releases since 9.4, however releases up to
9.6 are EOL already so backpatch to 10 only.
Reviewed-by: Abhijit Menon-Sen
Reviewed-by: Alvaro Herrera
Backpatch-through: 10
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/36b8a501-5d73-277c-4972-f58a4dce088a%40enterprisedb.com
|
|
Commit 859b3003de disabled building of extended stats for inheritance
trees, to prevent updating the same catalog row twice. While that
resolved the issue, it also means there are no extended stats for
declaratively partitioned tables, because there are no data in the
non-leaf relations.
That also means declaratively partitioned tables were not affected by
the issue 859b3003de addressed, which means this is a regression
affecting queries that calculate estimates for the whole inheritance
tree as a whole (which includes e.g. GROUP BY queries).
But because partitioned tables are empty, we can invert the condition
and build statistics only for the case with inheritance, without losing
anything. And we can consider them when calculating estimates.
It may be necessary to run ANALYZE on partitioned tables, to collect
proper statistics. For declarative partitioning there should no prior
statistics, and it might take time before autoanalyze is triggered. For
tables partitioned by inheritance the statistics may include data from
child relations (if built 859b3003de), contradicting the current code.
Report and patch by Justin Pryzby, minor fixes and cleanup by me.
Backpatch all the way back to PostgreSQL 10, where extended statistics
were introduced (same as 859b3003de).
Author: Justin Pryzby
Reported-by: Justin Pryzby
Backpatch-through: 10
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20210923212624.GI831%40telsasoft.com
|
|
Since commit 859b3003de we only build extended statistics for individual
relations, ignoring the child relations. This resolved the issue with
updating catalog tuple twice, but we still tried to use the statistics
when calculating estimates for the whole inheritance tree. When the
relations contain very distinct data, it may produce bogus estimates.
This is roughly the same issue 427c6b5b9 addressed ~15 years ago, and we
fix it the same way - by ignoring extended statistics when calculating
estimates for the inheritance tree as a whole. We still consider
extended statistics when calculating estimates for individual child
relations, of course.
This may result in plan changes due to different estimates, but if the
old statistics were not describing the inheritance tree particularly
well it's quite likely the new plans is actually better.
Report and patch by Justin Pryzby, minor fixes and cleanup by me.
Backpatch all the way back to PostgreSQL 10, where extended statistics
were introduced (same as 859b3003de).
Author: Justin Pryzby
Reported-by: Justin Pryzby
Backpatch-through: 10
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20210923212624.GI831%40telsasoft.com
|
|
Commit 7745bc352 intended to ensure that whole-row Vars would be
printed with "::type" decoration in all contexts where plain
"var.*" notation would result in star-expansion, notably in
ROW() and VALUES() constructs. However, it missed the case of
INSERT with a single-row VALUES, as reported by Timur Khanjanov.
Nosing around ruleutils.c, I found a second oversight: the
code for RowCompareExpr generates ROW() notation without benefit
of an actual RowExpr, and naturally it wasn't in sync :-(.
(The code for FieldStore also does this, but we don't expect that
to generate strictly parsable SQL anyway, so I left it alone.)
Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/efaba6f9-4190-56be-8ff2-7a1674f9194f@intrans.baku.az
|
|
This fixes a loss of precision that occurs when the first input is
very close to 1, so that its logarithm is very small.
Formerly, during the initial low-precision calculation to estimate the
result weight, the logarithm was computed to a local rscale that was
capped to NUMERIC_MAX_DISPLAY_SCALE (1000). However, the base may be
as close as 1e-16383 to 1, hence its logarithm may be as small as
1e-16383, and so the local rscale needs to be allowed to exceed 16383,
otherwise all precision is lost, leading to a poor choice of rscale
for the full-precision calculation.
Fix this by removing the cap on the local rscale during the initial
low-precision calculation, as we already do in the full-precision
calculation. This doesn't change the fact that the initial calculation
is a low-precision approximation, computing the logarithm to around 8
significant digits, which is very fast, especially when the base is
very close to 1.
Patch by me, reviewed by Alvaro Herrera.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCV-Ceu%2BHpRMf416yUe4KKFv%3DtdgXQAe5-7S9tD%3D5E-T1g%40mail.gmail.com
|
|
get_variable_range() would incautiously believe that statistics
containing only an MCV list are sufficient to derive a range estimate.
That's okay for an enum-like column that contains only MCVs, but
otherwise the estimate could be pretty bad. Make it report that the
range is indeterminate unless the MCVs plus nullfrac account for
the whole table.
I don't think this needs a dedicated test case, since a quick code
coverage check verifies that the existing regression tests traverse
all the alternatives. There is room to doubt that a future-proof
test case could be built anyway, given that the submitted example
accidentally doesn't fail before v11.
Per bug #17207 from Simon Perepelitsa. Back-patch to v10.
In principle this has been broken all along, but I'm hesitant to
make such changes in 9.6, since if anyone is unhappy with 9.6.24's
behavior there will be no second chance to fix it.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17207-5265aefa79e333b4@postgresql.org
|
|
timetz_zone() delivered completely wrong answers if the zone was
specified by a dynamic TZ abbreviation, because it failed to account
for the difference between the POSIX conventions for field values in
struct pg_tm and the conventions used in PG-specific datetime code.
As a stopgap fix, just adjust the tm_year and tm_mon fields to match
PG conventions. This is fixed in a different way in HEAD (388e71af8)
but I don't want to back-patch the change of reference point.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJ7c6TOMG8zSNEZtCn5SPe+cCk3Lfxb71ZaQwT2F4T7PJ_t=KA@mail.gmail.com
|
|
The distance in phrase operator must be an integer value between zero
and MAXENTRYPOS inclusive. But previously the error message about
its valid value included the information about its upper limit
but not lower limit (i.e., zero). This commit improves the error message
so that it also includes the information about its lower limit.
Back-patch to v9.6 where full-text phrase search was supported.
Author: Kyotaro Horiguchi
Reviewed-by: Fujii Masao
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20210819.170315.1413060634876301811.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com
|
|
Formerly, the numeric code tested whether an integer value of a larger
type would fit in a smaller type by casting it to the smaller type and
then testing if the reverse conversion produced the original value.
That's perfectly fine, except that it caused a test failure on
buildfarm animal castoroides, most likely due to a compiler bug.
Instead, do these tests by comparing against PG_INT16/32_MIN/MAX. That
matches existing code in other places, such as int84(), which is more
widely tested, and so is less likely to go wrong.
While at it, add regression tests covering the numeric-to-int8/4/2
conversions, and adjust the recently added tests to the style of
434ddfb79a (on the v11 branch) to make failures easier to diagnose.
Per buildfarm via Tom Lane, reviewed by Tom Lane.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2394813.1628179479%40sss.pgh.pa.us
|
|
|
|
This fixes a long-standing bug when using to_char() to format a
numeric value in scientific notation -- if the value's exponent is
less than -NUMERIC_MAX_DISPLAY_SCALE-1 (-1001), it produced a
division-by-zero error.
The reason for this error was that get_str_from_var_sci() divides its
input by 10^exp, which it produced using power_var_int(). However, the
underflow test in power_var_int() causes it to return zero if the
result scale is too small. That's not a problem for power_var_int()'s
only other caller, power_var(), since that limits the rscale to 1000,
but in get_str_from_var_sci() the exponent can be much smaller,
requiring a much larger rscale. Fix by introducing a new function to
compute 10^exp directly, with no rscale limit. This also allows 10^exp
to be computed more efficiently, without any numeric multiplication,
division or rounding.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCWhojfH4whaqgUKBe8D5jNHB8ytzemL-PnRx+KCTyMXmg@mail.gmail.com
|
|
This fixes a couple of related problems that arise when raising
numbers to very large powers.
Firstly, when raising a negative number to a very large integer power,
the result should be well-defined, but the previous code would only
cope if the exponent was small enough to go through power_var_int().
Otherwise it would throw an internal error, attempting to take the
logarithm of a negative number. Fix this by adding suitable handling
to the general case in power_var() to cope with negative bases,
checking for integer powers there.
Next, when raising a (positive or negative) number whose absolute
value is slightly less than 1 to a very large power, the result should
approach zero as the power is increased. However, in some cases, for
sufficiently large powers, this would lose all precision and return 1
instead of 0. This was due to the way that the local_rscale was being
calculated for the final full-precision calculation:
local_rscale = rscale + (int) val - ln_dweight + 8
The first two terms on the right hand side are meant to give the
number of significant digits required in the result ("val" being the
estimated result weight). However, this failed to account for the fact
that rscale is clipped to a maximum of NUMERIC_MAX_DISPLAY_SCALE
(1000), and the result weight might be less then -1000, causing their
sum to be negative, leading to a loss of precision. Fix this by
forcing the number of significant digits calculated to be nonnegative.
It's OK for it to be zero (when the result weight is less than -1000),
since the local_rscale value then includes a few extra digits to
ensure an accurate result.
Finally, add additional underflow checks to exp_var() and power_var(),
so that they consistently return zero for cases like this where the
result is indistinguishable from zero. Some paths through this code
already returned zero in such cases, but others were throwing overflow
errors.
Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Yugo Nagata.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCW6Dvq7+3wN3tt5jLj-FyOcUgT5xNoOqce5=6Su0bCR0w@mail.gmail.com
|
|
The error messages using the word "non-negative" are confusing
because it's ambiguous about whether it accepts zero or not.
This commit improves those error messages by replacing it with
less ambiguous word like "greater than zero" or
"greater than or equal to zero".
Also this commit added the note about the word "non-negative" to
the error message style guide, to help writing the new error messages.
When postgres_fdw option fetch_size was set to zero, previously
the error message "fetch_size requires a non-negative integer value"
was reported. This error message was outright buggy. Therefore
back-patch to all supported versions where such buggy error message
could be thrown.
Reported-by: Hou Zhijie
Author: Bharath Rupireddy
Reviewed-by: Kyotaro Horiguchi, Fujii Masao
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/OS0PR01MB5716415335A06B489F1B3A8194569@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
|
|
This fixes an overflow error when using the numeric * operator if the
result has more than 16383 digits after the decimal point by rounding
the result. Overflow errors should only occur if the result has too
many digits *before* the decimal point.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCUmeFWCrq2dNzZpRj5+6LfN85jYiDoqm+ucSXhb9U2TbA@mail.gmail.com
|
|
I accidentally missed adding this when adjusting 55fe60938 for back
patching. This adjustment was made for 9.6 to 13. 14 and master are not
affected.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvp=twCsGAGQG=A=cqOaj4mpknPBW-EZB-sd+5ZS5gCTtA@mail.gmail.com
|
|
Due to how pg_size_pretty(bigint) was implemented, it's possible that when
given a negative number of bytes that the returning value would not match
the equivalent positive return value when given the equivalent positive
number of bytes. This was due to two separate issues.
1. The function used bit shifting to convert the number of bytes into
larger units. The rounding performed by bit shifting is not the same as
dividing. For example -3 >> 1 = -2, but -3 / 2 = -1. These two
operations are only equivalent with positive numbers.
2. The half_rounded() macro rounded towards positive infinity. This meant
that negative numbers rounded towards zero and positive numbers rounded
away from zero.
Here we fix #1 by dividing the values instead of bit shifting. We fix #2
by adjusting the half_rounded macro always to round away from zero.
Additionally, adjust the pg_size_pretty(numeric) function to be more
explicit that it's using division rather than bit shifting. A casual
observer might have believed bit shifting was used due to a static
function being named numeric_shift_right. However, that function was
calculating the divisor from the number of bits and performed division.
Here we make that more clear. This change is just cosmetic and does not
affect the return value of the numeric version of the function.
Here we also add a set of regression tests both versions of
pg_size_pretty() which test the values directly before and after the
function switches to the next unit.
This bug was introduced in 8a1fab36a. Prior to that negative values were
always displayed in bytes.
Author: Dean Rasheed, David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCXnNW4HsmZnxhfezR5FuiGgp+mkY4AzcL5eRGO4fuadWg@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 9.6, where the bug was introduced.
|
|
ICU 69 causes compile failures with PostgreSQL 10. ICU 69 has
switched to using stdbool.h, which conflicts with the home-made
definitions that we used until PostgreSQL 10. Newer PostgreSQL major
versions are therefore not affected. (Older PostgreSQL versions don't
have ICU support.)
The workaround is to undefine "bool" after including ICU headers,
similar to the solution already in place for plperl for the same
underlying reasons.
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/28588e5a-c204-0361-01f1-a1ee1b590233%40enterprisedb.com
|
|
Previously, a zero value for the relfilenode resulted in
a confusing error message about "unexpected duplicate".
This function returns NULL for other invalid relfilenode
values, so zero should be treated likewise.
It's been like this all along, so back-patch to all supported
branches.
Justin Pryzby
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20210612023324.GT16435@telsasoft.com
|
|
This case should be disallowed, just as FOR UPDATE with a plain
GROUP BY is disallowed; FOR UPDATE only makes sense when each row
of the query result can be identified with a single table row.
However, we missed teaching CheckSelectLocking() to check
groupingSets as well as groupClause, so that it would allow
degenerate grouping sets. That resulted in a bad plan and
a null-pointer dereference in the executor.
Looking around for other instances of the same bug, the only one
I found was in examine_simple_variable(). That'd just lead to
silly estimates, but it should be fixed too.
Per private report from Yaoguang Chen.
Back-patch to all supported branches.
|
|
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
|
|
Using Roman numbers (via "RM" or "rm") for a conversion to calculate a
number of months has never considered the case of negative numbers,
where a conversion could easily cause out-of-bound memory accesses. The
conversions in themselves were not completely consistent either, as
specifying 12 would result in NULL, but it should mean XII.
This commit reworks the conversion calculation to have a more
consistent behavior:
- If the number of months and years is 0, return NULL.
- If the number of months is positive, return the exact month number.
- If the number of months is negative, do a backward calculation, with
-1 meaning December, -2 November, etc.
Reported-by: Theodor Arsenij Larionov-Trichkin
Author: Julien Rouhaud
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16953-f255a18f8c51f1d5@postgresql.org
backpatch-through: 9.6
|
|
When estimating the number of groups using extended statistics, the code
was discarding information about system attributes. This led to strange
situation that
SELECT 1 FROM t GROUP BY ctid;
could have produced higher estimate (equal to pg_class.reltuples) than
SELECT 1 FROM t GROUP BY a, b, ctid;
with extended statistics on (a,b). Fixed by retaining information about
the system attribute.
Backpatch all the way to 10, where extended statistics were introduced.
Author: Tomas Vondra
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
Given a regex pattern with a very long fixed prefix (approaching 500
characters), the result of pow(FIXED_CHAR_SEL, fixed_prefix_len) can
underflow to zero. Typically the preceding selectivity calculation
would have underflowed as well, so that we compute 0/0 and get NaN.
In released branches this leads to an assertion failure later on.
That doesn't happen in HEAD, for reasons I've not explored yet,
but it's surely still a bug.
To fix, just skip the division when the pow() result is zero, so
that we'll (most likely) return a zero selectivity estimate. In
the edge cases where "sel" didn't yet underflow, perhaps this
isn't desirable, but I'm not sure that the case is worth spending
a lot of effort on. The results of regex_selectivity_sub() are
barely worth the electrons they're written on anyway :-(
Per report from Alexander Lakhin. Back-patch to all supported versions.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/6de0a0c3-ada9-cd0c-3e4e-2fa9964b41e3@gmail.com
|
|
Commit bc43b7c2c0 used fabs() directly on an int variable, which
apparently requires an explicit cast on some platforms.
Per buildfarm.
|
|
In power_var_int(), the computation of the number of significant
digits to use in the computation used log(Abs(exp)), which isn't safe
because Abs(exp) returns INT_MIN when exp is INT_MIN. Use fabs()
instead of Abs(), so that the exponent is cast to a double before the
absolute value is taken.
Back-patch to 9.6, where this was introduced (by 7d9a4737c2).
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCVd6pMkz=BrZEgBKyqqJrt2xghr=fNc8+Z=5xC6cgWrWA@mail.gmail.com
|
|
This makes existing sessions reflect "ALTER ROLE ... [NO]INHERIT" as
quickly as they have been reflecting "GRANT role_name". Back-patch to
9.5 (all supported versions).
Reviewed by Nathan Bossart.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20201221095028.GB3777719@rfd.leadboat.com
|
|
The jsonb || jsonb operator arbitrarily rejected certain combinations
of scalar and non-scalar inputs, while being willing to concatenate
other combinations. This was of course quite undocumented. Rather
than trying to document it, let's just remove the restriction,
creating a uniform rule that unless we are handling an object-to-object
concatenation, non-array inputs are converted to one-element arrays,
resulting in an array-to-array concatenation. (This does not change
the behavior for any case that didn't throw an error before.)
Per complaint from Joel Jacobson. Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/163099.1608312033@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
|
Introduce TimestampDifferenceMilliseconds() to simplify callers
that would rather have the difference in milliseconds, instead of
the select()-oriented seconds-and-microseconds format. This gets
rid of at least one integer division per call, and it eliminates
some apparently-easy-to-mess-up arithmetic.
Two of these call sites were in fact wrong:
* pg_prewarm's autoprewarm_main() forgot to multiply the seconds
by 1000, thus ending up with a delay 1000X shorter than intended.
That doesn't quite make it a busy-wait, but close.
* postgres_fdw's pgfdw_get_cleanup_result() thought it needed to compute
microseconds not milliseconds, thus ending up with a delay 1000X longer
than intended. Somebody along the way had noticed this problem but
misdiagnosed the cause, and imposed an ad-hoc 60-second limit rather
than fixing the units. This was relatively harmless in context, because
we don't care that much about exactly how long this delay is; still,
it's wrong.
There are a few more callers of TimestampDifference() that don't
have a direct need for seconds-and-microseconds, but can't use
TimestampDifferenceMilliseconds() either because they do need
microsecond precision or because they might possibly deal with
intervals long enough to overflow 32-bit milliseconds. It might be
worth inventing another API to improve that, but that seems outside
the scope of this patch; so those callers are untouched here.
Given the fact that we are fixing some bugs, and the likelihood
that future patches might want to back-patch code that uses this
new API, back-patch to all supported branches.
Alexey Kondratov and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3b1c053a21c07c1ed5e00be3b2b855ef@postgrespro.ru
|
|
Previously, a conversion such as
to_date('-44-02-01','YYYY-MM-DD')
would result in '0045-02-01 BC', as the code attempted to interpret
the negative year as BC, but failed to apply the correction needed
for our internal handling of BC years. Fix the off-by-one problem.
Also, arrange for the combination of a negative year and an
explicit "BC" marker to cancel out and produce AD. This is how
the negative-century case works, so it seems sane to do likewise.
Continue to read "year 0000" as 1 BC. Oracle would throw an error,
but we've accepted that case for a long time so I'm hesitant to
change it in a back-patch.
Per bug #16419 from Saeed Hubaishan. Back-patch to all supported
branches.
Dar Alathar-Yemen and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16419-d8d9db0a7553f01b@postgresql.org
|
|
Several PGXN modules reference LockTagType values; renumbering would
force a recompile of those modules. Oversight in back-patch of today's
commit 566372b3d6435639e4cc4476d79b8505a0297c87. Back-patch to released
branches, v12 through 9.5.
Reported by Tom Lane.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/921383.1597523945@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
|
The SimpleLruTruncate() header comment states the new coding rule. To
achieve this, add locktype "frozenid" and two LWLocks. This closes a
rare opportunity for data loss, which manifested as "apparent
wraparound" or "could not access status of transaction" errors. Data
loss is more likely in pg_multixact, due to released branches' thin
margin between multiStopLimit and multiWrapLimit. If a user's physical
replication primary logged ": apparent wraparound" messages, the user
should rebuild standbys of that primary regardless of symptoms. At less
risk is a cluster having emitted "not accepting commands" errors or
"must be vacuumed" warnings at some point. One can test a cluster for
this data loss by running VACUUM FREEZE in every database. Back-patch
to 9.5 (all supported versions).
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190218073103.GA1434723@rfd.leadboat.com
|
|
The new hlCover() algorithm that I introduced in commit c9b0c678d
turns out to potentially take O(N^2) or worse time on long documents,
if there are many occurrences of individual query words but few or no
substrings that actually satisfy the query. (One way to hit this
behavior is with a "common_word & rare_word" type of query.) This
seems unavoidable given the original goal of checking every substring
of the document, so we have to back off that idea. Fortunately, it
seems unlikely that anyone would really want headlines spanning all of
a long document, so we can avoid the worse-than-linear behavior by
imposing a maximum length of substring that we'll consider.
For now, just hard-wire that maximum length as a multiple of max_words
times max_fragments. Perhaps at some point somebody will argue for
exposing it as a ts_headline parameter, but I'm hesitant to make such
a feature addition in a back-patched bug fix.
I also noted that the hlFirstIndex() function I'd added in that
commit was unnecessarily stupid: it really only needs to check whether
a HeadlineWordEntry's item pointer is null or not. This wouldn't make
all that much difference in typical cases with queries having just
a few terms, but a cycle shaved is a cycle earned.
In addition, add a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS call in TS_execute_recurse.
This ensures that hlCover's loop is cancellable if it manages to take
a long time, and it may protect some other TS_execute callers as well.
Back-patch to 9.6 as the previous commit was. I also chose to add the
CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS call to 9.5. The old hlCover() algorithm seems
to avoid the O(N^2) behavior, at least on the test case I tried, but
nonetheless it's not very quick on a long document.
Per report from Stephen Frost.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200724160535.GW12375@tamriel.snowman.net
|
|
Due to not having our signals straight about CRLF vs. LF line
termination, the output of pg_current_logfile() included a trailing
\r on Windows. To fix, force the file descriptor it uses into text
mode.
While here, move a couple of local variable declarations to make
the function's logic clearer.
In v12 and v13, also back-patch the test added by 1c4e88e2f so that
this function has some test coverage. However, the 004_logrotate.pl
test script doesn't exist before v12, and it didn't seem worth adding
to older branches just for this.
Per report from Thomas Kellerer. Back-patch to v10 where this
function was added.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/412ae8da-76bb-640f-039a-f3513499e53d@gmx.net
|
|
When merging two NumericAggStates, the code missed adding the new
state's NaNcount unless its N was also nonzero; since those counts
are independent, this is wrong.
This would only have visible effect if some partial aggregate scans
found only NaNs while earlier ones found only non-NaNs; then we could
end up falsely deciding that there were no NaNs and fail to return a
NaN final result as expected. That's pretty improbable, so it's no
surprise this hasn't been reported from the field. Still, it's a bug.
I didn't try to produce a regression test that would show the bug,
but I did notice that these functions weren't being reached at all
in our regression tests, so I improved the tests to at least
exercise them. With these additions, I see pretty complete code
coverage on the aggregation-related functions in numeric.c.
Back-patch to 9.6 where this code was introduced. (I only added
the improved test case as far back as v10, though, since the
relevant part of aggregates.sql isn't there at all in 9.6.)
|
|
It's intentional that we don't allow values greater than 24 hours,
while we do allow "24:00:00" as well as "23:59:60" as inputs.
However, the range check was miscoded in such a way that it would
accept "23:59:60.nnn" with a nonzero fraction. For time or timetz,
the stored result would then be greater than "24:00:00" which would
fail dump/reload, not to mention possibly confusing other operations.
Fix by explicitly calculating the result and making sure it does not
exceed 24 hours. (This calculation is redundant with what will happen
later in tm2time or tm2timetz. Maybe someday somebody will find that
annoying enough to justify refactoring to avoid the duplication; but
that seems too invasive for a back-patched bug fix, and the cost is
probably unmeasurable anyway.)
Note that this change also rejects such input as the time portion
of a timestamp(tz) value.
Back-patch to v10. The bug is far older, but to change this pre-v10
we'd need to ensure that the logic behaves sanely with float timestamps,
which is possibly nontrivial due to roundoff considerations.
Doesn't really seem worth troubling with.
Per report from Christoph Berg.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200520125807.GB296739@msg.df7cb.de
|
|
This issue has been present since the introduction of this code as of
a3519a2 from 2002, and has been found by buildfarm member prion that
uses RELCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE via the tests introduced recently in
e786be5.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200601022055.GB4121@paquier.xyz
Backpatch-through: 9.5
|
|
The repeat() function loops for potentially a long time without
ever checking for interrupts. This prevents, for example, a query
cancel from interrupting until the work is all done. Fix by
inserting a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() into the loop.
Backpatch to all supported versions.
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/8692553c-7fe8-17d9-cbc1-7cddb758f4c6%40joeconway.com
|
|
Visual Studio 2015 and later versions should still be able to do the same
as Visual Studio 2012, but the declaration of locale_name is missing in
_locale_t, causing the code compilation to fail, hence this falls back
instead on to enumerating all system locales by using EnumSystemLocalesEx
to find the required locale name. If the input argument is in Unix-style
then we can get ISO Locale name directly by using GetLocaleInfoEx() with
LCType as LOCALE_SNAME.
In passing, change the documentation references of the now obsolete links.
Note that this problem occurs only with NLS enabled builds.
Author: Juan José Santamaría Flecha, Davinder Singh and Amit Kapila
Reviewed-by: Ranier Vilela and Amit Kapila
Backpatch-through: 9.5
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAHzhFSFoJEWezR96um4-rg5W6m2Rj9Ud2CNZvV4NWc9tXV7aXQ@mail.gmail.com
|
|
checkcondition_str() failed to report multiple matches for a prefix
pattern correctly: it would dutifully merge the match positions, but
then after exiting that loop, if the last prefix-matching word had
had no suitable positions, it would report there were no matches.
The upshot would be failing to recognize a match that the query
should match.
It looks like you need all of these conditions to see the bug:
* a phrase search (else we don't ask for match position details)
* a prefix search item (else we don't get to this code)
* a weight restriction (else checkclass_str won't fail)
Noted while investigating a problem report from Pavel Borisov,
though this is distinct from the issue he was on about.
Back-patch to 9.6 where phrase search was added.
|
|
Writing a trailing semicolon in a macro is almost never the right thing,
because you almost always want to write a semicolon after each macro
call instead. (Even if there was some reason to prefer not to, pgindent
would probably make a hash of code formatted that way; so within PG the
rule should basically be "don't do it".) Thus, if we have a semi inside
the macro, the compiler sees "something;;". Much of the time the extra
empty statement is harmless, but it could lead to mysterious syntax
errors at call sites. In perhaps an overabundance of neatnik-ism, let's
run around and get rid of the excess semicolons whereever possible.
The only thing worse than a mysterious syntax error is a mysterious
syntax error that only happens in the back branches; therefore,
backpatch these changes where relevant, which is most of them because
most of these mistakes are old. (The lack of reported problems shows
that this is largely a hypothetical issue, but still, it could bite
us in some future patch.)
John Naylor and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CACPNZCs0qWTqJ2QUSGJ07B7uvAvzMb-KbG2q+oo+J3tsWN5cqw@mail.gmail.com
|
|
Queries such as '!(foo<->bar)' failed to find matching rows when
implemented as a GiST or GIN index search. That's because of
failing to handle phrase searches as tri-valued when considering
a query without any position information for the target tsvector.
We can only say that the phrase operator might match, not that it
does match; and therefore its NOT also might match. The previous
coding incorrectly inverted the approximate phrase result to
decide that there was certainly no match.
To fix, we need to make TS_phrase_execute return a real ternary result,
and then bubble that up accurately in TS_execute. As long as we have
to do that anyway, we can simplify the baroque things TS_phrase_execute
was doing internally to manage tri-valued searching with only a bool
as explicit result.
For now, I left the externally-visible result of TS_execute as a plain
bool. There do not appear to be any outside callers that need to
distinguish a three-way result, given that they passed in a flag
saying what to do in the absence of position data. This might need
to change someday, but we wouldn't want to back-patch such a change.
Although tsginidx.c has its own TS_execute_ternary implementation for
use at upper index levels, that sadly managed to get this case wrong
as well :-(. Fixing it is a lot easier fortunately.
Per bug #16388 from Charles Offenbacher. Back-patch to 9.6 where
phrase search was introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16388-98cffba38d0b7e6e@postgresql.org
|
|
The views pg_stat_progress_* had not gotten the memo that
pg_read_all_stats is supposed to be able to read all statistics. Also
make a pass over all text-returning pg_stat_xyz functions that could
return "insufficient privilege" and make sure they also respect
pg_read_all_status.
Reported-by: Andrey M. Borodin
Reviewed-by: Andrey M. Borodin, Kyotaro Horiguchi
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/13145F2F-8458-4977-9D2D-7B2E862E5722@yandex-team.ru
|
|
Our documentation describes four allowed input syntaxes for circles,
but the regression tests tried only three ... with predictable
consequences. Remarkably, this has been wrong since the circle
datatype was added in 1997, but nobody noticed till now.
David Zhang, with some help from me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/332c47fa-d951-7574-b5cc-a8f7f7201202@highgo.ca
|
|
Since the existing bit number argument can't exceed INT32_MAX, it's
not possible for these functions to manipulate bits beyond the first
256MB of a bytea value. However, it'd be good if they could do at
least that much, and not fall over entirely for longer bytea values.
Adjust the comparisons to be done in int64 arithmetic so that works.
Also tweak the error reports to show sane values in case of overflow.
Also add some test cases to improve the miserable code coverage
of these functions.
Apply patch to back branches only; HEAD has a better solution
as of commit 26a944cf2.
Extracted from a much larger patch by Movead Li
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200312115135445367128@highgo.ca
|
|
Buildfarm experience shows that this function can fail with ENOENT
if some other process unlinks a file between when we read the directory
entry and when we try to stat() it. The problem is old but we had
not noticed it until 085b6b667 added regression test coverage.
To fix, just ignore ENOENT failures. There is one other case that
this might hide: a symlink that points to nowhere. That seems okay
though, at least better than erroring.
Back-patch to v10 where this function was added, since the regression
test cases were too.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200308173103.GC1357@telsasoft.com
|
|
This extends the fixes made in commit 085b6b667 to other SRFs with the
same bug, namely pg_logdir_ls(), pgrowlocks(), pg_timezone_names(),
pg_ls_dir(), and pg_tablespace_databases().
Also adjust various comments and documentation to warn against
expecting to clean up resources during a ValuePerCall SRF's final
call.
Back-patch to all supported branches, since these functions were
all born broken.
Justin Pryzby, with cosmetic tweaks by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200308173103.GC1357@telsasoft.com
|
