| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
As an optimization, we store "name" columns as cstrings in btree
indexes.
Here we modify it so that Index Only Scans convert these cstrings back
to names with NAMEDATALEN bytes rather than storing the cstring in the
tuple slot, as was happening previously.
Bug: #17855
Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin
Reviewed-by: Alexander Lakhin, Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17855-5f523e0f9769a566@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 12, all supported versions
|
|
Commit e7cb7ee14 allowed custom scan providers to create CustomPath
paths for join relations as well, but missed updating the comments.
Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPmGK15ODkN%2B%3DhkBCufj1HBW0x5OTb65Xuy7ryXchMdiCMpx_g%40mail.gmail.com
|
|
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
|
|
Some more things I didn't think about in commits 3f7323cbb et al:
MULTIEXPR_SUBLINK subplans might have been converted to initplans
instead of regular subplans, in which case they won't show up in
the modified targetlist. Fortunately, this would only happen if
they have no input parameters, which means that the problem we
originally needed to fix can't happen with them. Therefore, there's
no need to clone their output parameters, and thus it doesn't hurt
that we'll fail to see them in the first pass over the targetlist.
Nonetheless, this complicates matters greatly, because now we have
to distinguish output Params of initplans (which shouldn't get
renumbered) from those of regular subplans (which should).
This also breaks the simplistic scheme I used of assuming that the
subplans found in the targetlist have consecutive subLinkIds.
We really can't avoid the need to know the subplans' subLinkIds in
this code. To fix that, add subLinkId as the last field of SubPlan.
We can get away with that change in back branches because SubPlan
nodes will never be stored in the catalogs, and there's no ABI
break for external code that might be looking at the existing
fields of SubPlan.
Secondly, rewriteTargetListIU might have rolled up multiple
FieldStores or SubscriptingRefs into one targetlist entry,
breaking the assumption that there's at most one Param to fix
per targetlist entry. (That assumption is OK I think in the
ruleutils.c code I stole the logic from in 18f51083c, because
that only deals with pre-rewrite query trees. But it's
definitely not OK here.) Abandon that shortcut and just do a
full tree walk on the targetlist to ensure we find all the
Params we have to change.
Per bug #17606 from Andre Lin. As before, only v10-v13 need the
patch.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17606-e5c8ad18d31db96a@postgresql.org
|
|
Using ATSimpleRecursion() in ATPrepCmd() to do so as bbb927b4db9b did is
not correct, because ATPrepCmd() can't distinguish between triggers that
may be cloned and those that may not, so would wrongly try to recurse
for the latter category of triggers.
So this commit restores the code in EnableDisableTrigger() that
86f575948c77 had added to do the recursion, which would do it only for
triggers that may be cloned, that is, row-level triggers. This also
changes tablecmds.c such that ATExecCmd() is able to pass the value of
ONLY flag down to EnableDisableTrigger() using its new 'recurse'
parameter.
This also fixes what seems like an oversight of 86f575948c77 that the
recursion to partition triggers would only occur if EnableDisableTrigger()
had actually changed the trigger. It is more apt to recurse to inspect
partition triggers even if the parent's trigger didn't need to be
changed: only then can we be certain that all descendants share the same
state afterwards.
Backpatch all the way back to 11, like bbb927b4db9b. Care is taken not
to break ABI compatibility (and that no catversion bump is needed.)
Co-authored-by: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Dmitry Koval <d.koval@postgrespro.ru>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqG-cZT3XzGAnEgZQLoQbyfJApVwOTQaCaas1mhpf+4V5A@mail.gmail.com
|
|
inline_cte() expected to find exactly as many references to the
target CTE as its cterefcount indicates. While that should be
accurate for the tree as emitted by the parser, there are some
optimizations that occur upstream of here that could falsify it,
notably removal of unused subquery output expressions.
Trying to make the accounting 100% accurate seems expensive and
doomed to future breakage. It's not really worth it, because
all this code is protecting is downstream assumptions that every
referenced CTE has a plan. Let's convert those assertions to
regular test-and-elog just in case there's some actual problem,
and then drop the failing assertion.
Per report from Tomas Vondra (thanks also to Richard Guo for
analysis). Back-patch to v12 where the faulty code came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/29196a1e-ed47-c7ca-9be2-b1c636816183@enterprisedb.com
|
|
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
|
|
If an index has both returnable and non-returnable columns, and one of
the non-returnable columns is an expression using a Var that is in a
returnable column, then a query returning that expression could result
in an index-only scan plan that attempts to read the non-returnable
column, instead of recomputing the expression from the returnable
column as intended.
To fix, redefine the "indextlist" list of an IndexOnlyScan plan node
as containing null Consts in place of any non-returnable columns.
This solves the problem by preventing setrefs.c from falsely matching
to such entries. The executor is happy since it only cares about the
exposed types of the entries, and ruleutils.c doesn't care because a
correct plan won't reference those entries. I considered some other
ways to prevent setrefs.c from doing the wrong thing, but this way
seems good since (a) it allows a very localized fix, (b) it makes
the indextlist structure more compact in many cases, and (c) the
indextlist is now a more faithful representation of what the index AM
will actually produce, viz. nulls for any non-returnable columns.
This is easier to hit since we introduced included columns, but it's
possible to construct failing examples without that, as per the
added regression test. Hence, back-patch to all supported branches.
Per bug #17350 from Louis Jachiet.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17350-b5bdcf476e5badbb@postgresql.org
|
|
transformLockingClause neglected to exclude the pseudo-RTEs for
OLD/NEW when processing a rule's query. This led to odd errors
or even crashes later on. This bug is very ancient, but it's
not terribly surprising that nobody noticed, since the use-case
for SELECT FOR UPDATE in a non-view rule is somewhere between
thin and non-existent. Still, crashing is not OK.
Per bug #17151 from Zhiyong Wu. Thanks to Masahiko Sawada
for analysis of the problem.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17151-c03a3e6e4ec9aadb@postgresql.org
|
|
A couple error messages and comments used 'statistic kind', not the
correct 'statistics kind'. Fix and backpatch all the way back to 10,
where extended statistics were introduced.
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
If ExecGetInsertedCols(), ExecGetUpdatedCols() or ExecGetExtraUpdatedCols()
were called with a ResultRelInfo that's not in the range table and isn't a
partition routing target, the functions would dereference a NULL pointer,
relinfo->ri_RootResultRelInfo. Such ResultRelInfos are created when firing
RI triggers in tables that are not modified directly. None of the current
callers of these functions pass such relations, so this isn't a live bug,
but let's make them more robust.
Also update comment in ResultRelInfo; after commit 6214e2b228,
ri_RangeTableIndex is zero for ResultRelInfos created for partition tuple
routing.
Noted by Coverity. Backpatch down to v11, like commit 6214e2b228.
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Amit Langote
|
|
If a cross-partition UPDATE violates a constraint on the target partition,
and the columns in the new partition are in different physical order than
in the parent, the error message can reveal columns that the user does not
have SELECT permission on. A similar bug was fixed earlier in commit
804b6b6db4.
The cause of the bug is that the callers of the
ExecBuildSlotValueDescription() function got confused when constructing
the list of modified columns. If the tuple was routed from a parent, we
converted the tuple to the parent's format, but the list of modified
columns was grabbed directly from the child's RTE entry.
ExecUpdateLockMode() had a similar issue. That lead to confusion on which
columns are key columns, leading to wrong tuple lock being taken on tables
referenced by foreign keys, when a row is updated with INSERT ON CONFLICT
UPDATE. A new isolation test is added for that corner case.
With this patch, the ri_RangeTableIndex field is no longer set for
partitions that don't have an entry in the range table. Previously, it was
set to the RTE entry of the parent relation, but that was confusing.
NOTE: This modifies the ResultRelInfo struct, replacing the
ri_PartitionRoot field with ri_RootResultRelInfo. That's a bit risky to
backpatch, because it breaks any extensions accessing the field. The
change that ri_RangeTableIndex is not set for partitions could potentially
break extensions, too. The ResultRelInfos are visible to FDWs at least,
and this patch required small changes to postgres_fdw. Nevertheless, this
seem like the least bad option. I don't think these fields widely used in
extensions; I don't think there are FDWs out there that uses the FDW
"direct update" API, other than postgres_fdw. If there is, you will get a
compilation error, so hopefully it is caught quickly.
Backpatch to 11, where support for both cross-partition UPDATEs, and unique
indexes on partitioned tables, were added.
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote
Security: CVE-2021-3393
|
|
As it stood, expandTableLikeClause() re-did the same relation_openrv
call that transformTableLikeClause() had done. However there are
scenarios where this would not find the same table as expected.
We hold lock on the LIKE source table, so it can't be renamed or
dropped, but another table could appear before it in the search path.
This explains the odd behavior reported in bug #16758 when cloning a
table as a temp table of the same name. This case worked as expected
before commit 502898192 introduced the need to open the source table
twice, so we should fix it.
To make really sure we get the same table, let's re-open it by OID not
name. That requires adding an OID field to struct TableLikeClause,
which is a little nervous-making from an ABI standpoint, but as long
as it's at the end I don't think there's any serious risk.
Per bug #16758 from Marc Boeren. Like the previous patch,
back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16758-840e84a6cfab276d@postgresql.org
|
|
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
|
|
It's unsafe to do this at parse time because addition of generated
columns to a table would not invalidate stored rules containing
UPDATEs on the table ... but there might now be dependent generated
columns that were not there when the rule was made. This also fixes
an oversight that rewriteTargetView failed to update extraUpdatedCols
when transforming an UPDATE on an updatable view. (Since the new
calculation is downstream of that, rewriteTargetView doesn't actually
need to do anything; but before, there was a demonstrable bug there.)
In v13 and HEAD, this leads to easily-visible bugs because (since
commit c6679e4fc) we won't recalculate generated columns that aren't
listed in extraUpdatedCols. In v12 this bitmap is mostly just used
for trigger-firing decisions, so you'd only notice a problem if a
trigger cared whether a generated column had been updated.
I'd complained about this back in May, but then forgot about it
until bug #16671 from Michael Paul Killian revived the issue.
Back-patch to v12 where this field was introduced. If existing
stored rules contain any extraUpdatedCols values, they'll be
ignored because the rewriter will overwrite them, so the bug will
be fixed even for existing rules. (But note that if someone were
to update to 13.1 or 12.5, store some rules with UPDATEs on tables
having generated columns, and then downgrade to a prior minor version,
they might observe issues similar to what this patch fixes. That
seems unlikely enough to not be worth going to a lot of effort to fix.)
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/10206.1588964727@sss.pgh.pa.us
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16671-2fa55851859fb166@postgresql.org
|
|
If a CREATE TABLE command uses both LIKE and traditional inheritance,
Vars in CHECK constraints and expression indexes that are absorbed
from a LIKE parent table tended to get mis-numbered, resulting in
wrong answers and/or bizarre error messages (though probably not any
actual crashes, thanks to validation occurring in the executor).
In v12 and up, the same could happen to Vars in GENERATED expressions,
even in cases with no LIKE clause but multiple traditional-inheritance
parents.
The cause of the problem for LIKE is that parse_utilcmd.c supposed
it could renumber such Vars correctly during transformCreateStmt(),
which it cannot since we have not yet accounted for columns added via
inheritance. Fix that by postponing processing of LIKE INCLUDING
CONSTRAINTS, DEFAULTS, GENERATED, INDEXES till after we've performed
DefineRelation().
The error with GENERATED and multiple inheritance is a simple oversight
in MergeAttributes(); it knows it has to renumber Vars in inherited
CHECK constraints, but forgot to apply the same processing to inherited
GENERATED expressions (a/k/a defaults).
Per bug #16272 from Tom Gottfried. The non-GENERATED variants of the
issue are ancient, presumably dating right back to the addition of
CREATE TABLE LIKE; hence back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16272-6e32da020e9a9381@postgresql.org
|
|
Commit a477bfc1d fixed eval_const_expressions() to ensure that it
didn't generate unnecessary RelabelType nodes, but I failed to notice
that some other places in the planner had the same issue. Really
noplace in the planner should be using plain makeRelabelType(), for
fear of generating expressions that should be equal() to semantically
equivalent trees, but aren't.
An example is that because canonicalize_ec_expression() failed
to be careful about this, we could end up with an equivalence class
containing both a plain Const, and a Const-with-RelabelType
representing exactly the same value. So far as I can tell this led to
no visible misbehavior, but we did waste a bunch of cycles generating
and evaluating "Const = Const-with-RelabelType" to prove such entries
are redundant.
Hence, move the support function added by a477bfc1d to where it can
be more generally useful, and use it in the places where planner code
previously used makeRelabelType.
Back-patch to v12, like the previous patch. While I have no concrete
evidence of any real misbehavior here, it's certainly possible that
I overlooked a case where equivalent expressions that aren't equal()
could cause a user-visible problem. In any case carrying extra
RelabelType nodes through planning to execution isn't very desirable.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1311836.1597781384@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
|
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
|
|
This reverts commit cb2fd7eac285b1b0a24eeb2b8ed4456b66c5a09f. Per
numerous buildfarm members, it was incompatible with parallel query, and
a test case assumed LP64. Back-patch to 9.5 (all supported versions).
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200321224920.GB1763544@rfd.leadboat.com
|
|
Until now, only selected bulk operations (e.g. COPY) did this. If a
given relfilenode received both a WAL-skipping COPY and a WAL-logged
operation (e.g. INSERT), recovery could lose tuples from the COPY. See
src/backend/access/transam/README section "Skipping WAL for New
RelFileNode" for the new coding rules. Maintainers of table access
methods should examine that section.
To maintain data durability, just before commit, we choose between an
fsync of the relfilenode and copying its contents to WAL. A new GUC,
wal_skip_threshold, guides that choice. If this change slows a workload
that creates small, permanent relfilenodes under wal_level=minimal, try
adjusting wal_skip_threshold. Users setting a timeout on COMMIT may
need to adjust that timeout, and log_min_duration_statement analysis
will reflect time consumption moving to COMMIT from commands like COPY.
Internally, this requires a reliable determination of whether
RollbackAndReleaseCurrentSubTransaction() would unlink a relation's
current relfilenode. Introduce rd_firstRelfilenodeSubid. Amend the
specification of rd_createSubid such that the field is zero when a new
rel has an old rd_node. Make relcache.c retain entries for certain
dropped relations until end of transaction.
Back-patch to 9.5 (all supported versions). This introduces a new WAL
record type, XLOG_GIST_ASSIGN_LSN, without bumping XLOG_PAGE_MAGIC. As
always, update standby systems before master systems. This changes
sizeof(RelationData) and sizeof(IndexStmt), breaking binary
compatibility for affected extensions. (The most recent commit to
affect the same class of extensions was
089e4d405d0f3b94c74a2c6a54357a84a681754b.)
Kyotaro Horiguchi, reviewed (in earlier, similar versions) by Robert
Haas. Heikki Linnakangas and Michael Paquier implemented earlier
designs that materially clarified the problem. Reviewed, in earlier
designs, by Andrew Dunstan, Andres Freund, Alvaro Herrera, Tom Lane,
Fujii Masao, and Simon Riggs. Reported by Martijn van Oosterhout.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20150702220524.GA9392@svana.org
|
|
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
|
|
The RTE_RESULT simplification logic added by commit 4be058fe9 had a
flaw: it would collapse out a RTE_RESULT that is due to compute a
PlaceHolderVar, and reassign the PHV to the parent join level, even if
another input relation of the join contained a lateral reference to
the PHV. That can't work because the PHV would be computed too late.
In practice it led to failures of internal sanity checks later in
planning (either assertion failures or errors such as "failed to
construct the join relation").
To fix, add code to check for the presence of such PHVs in relevant
portions of the query tree. Notably, this required refactoring
range_table_walker so that a caller could ask to walk individual RTEs
not the whole list. (It might be a good idea to refactor
range_table_mutator in the same way, if only to keep those functions
looking similar; but I didn't do so here as it wasn't necessary for
the bug fix.)
This exercise also taught me that find_dependent_phvs(), as it stood,
could only safely be used on the entire Query, not on subtrees.
Adjust its API to reflect that; which in passing allows it to have
a fast path for the common case of no PHVs anywhere.
Per report from Will Leinweber. Back-patch to v12 where the bug
was introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CALLb-4xJMd4GZt2YCecMC95H-PafuWNKcmps4HLRx2NHNBfB4g@mail.gmail.com
|
|
query_tree_walker and query_tree_mutator were skipping the
windowClause of the query, without regard for the fact that the
startOffset and endOffset in a WindowClause node are expression trees
that need to be processed. This was an oversight in commit ec4be2ee6
from 2010 which added the expression fields; the main symptom is that
function parameters in window frame clauses don't work in inlined
functions.
Fix (as conservatively as possible since this needs to not break
existing out-of-tree callers) and add tests.
Backpatch all the way, since this has been broken since 9.0.
Per report from Alastair McKinley; fix by me with kibitzing and review
from Tom Lane.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/DB6PR0202MB2904E7FDDA9D81504D1E8C68E3800@DB6PR0202MB2904.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com
|
|
Lack of parens in the definitions could cause a statement using these
macros to have unexpected semantics. In current code no bug is
apparent, but best to fix the definitions to avoid problems down the
line.
Reported-by: Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/19795.1568400476@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
|
The progress state was being clobbered once the first index completed
being rebuilt, causing the final phases of the operation not show
anything in the progress view. This was inadvertently broken in
03f9e5cba0ee, which added progress tracking for REINDEX.
(The reason this bugfix is this small is that I had already noticed this
problem when writing monitoring for CREATE INDEX, and had already worked
around it, as can be seen in discussion starting at
https://postgr.es/m/20190329150218.GA25010@alvherre.pgsql Fixing the
problem is just a matter of fixing one place touched by the REINDEX
monitoring.)
Reported by: Álvaro Herrera
Author: Álvaro Herrera
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190801184333.GA21369@alvherre.pgsql
|
|
In ad0bda5d24ea I changed the EvalPlanQual machinery to store
substitution tuples in slot, instead of using plain HeapTuples. The
main motivation for that was that using HeapTuples will be inefficient
for future tableams. But it turns out that that conversion was buggy
for non-locking rowmarks - the wrong tuple descriptor was used to
create the slot.
As a secondary issue 5db6df0c0 changed ExecLockRows() to begin EPQ
earlier, to allow to fetch the locked rows directly into the EPQ
slots, instead of having to copy tuples around. Unfortunately, as Tom
complained, that forces some expensive initialization to happen
earlier.
As a third issue, the test coverage for EPQ was clearly insufficient.
Fixing the first issue is unfortunately not trivial: Non-locked row
marks were fetched at the start of EPQ, and we don't have the type
information for the rowmarks available at that point. While we could
change that, it's not easy. It might be worthwhile to change that at
some point, but to fix this bug, it seems better to delay fetching
non-locking rowmarks when they're actually needed, rather than
eagerly. They're referenced at most once, and in cases where EPQ
fails, might never be referenced. Fetching them when needed also
increases locality a bit.
To be able to fetch rowmarks during execution, rather than
initialization, we need to be able to access the active EPQState, as
that contains necessary data. To do so move EPQ related data from
EState to EPQState, and, only for EStates creates as part of EPQ,
reference the associated EPQState from EState.
To fix the second issue, change EPQ initialization to allow use of
EvalPlanQualSlot() to be used before EvalPlanQualBegin() (but
obviously still requiring EvalPlanQualInit() to have been done).
As these changes made struct EState harder to understand, e.g. by
adding multiple EStates, significantly reorder the members, and add a
lot more comments.
Also add a few more EPQ tests, including one that fails for the first
issue above. More is needed.
Reported-By: yi huang
Author: Andres Freund
Reviewed-By: Tom Lane
Discussion:
https://postgr.es/m/CAHU7rYZo_C4ULsAx_LAj8az9zqgrD8WDd4hTegDTMM1LMqrBsg@mail.gmail.com
https://postgr.es/m/24530.1562686693@sss.pgh.pa.us
Backpatch: 12-, where the EPQ changes were introduced
|
|
In 5f32b29c1819 I changed the creation of HashState.hashkeys to
actually use HashState as the parent (instead of HashJoinState, which
was incorrect, as they were executed below HashState), to fix the
problem of hashkeys expressions otherwise relying on slot types
appropriate for HashJoinState, rather than HashState as would be
correct. That reliance was only introduced in 12, which is why it
previously worked to use HashJoinState as the parent (although I'd be
unsurprised if there were problematic cases).
Unfortunately that's not a sufficient solution, because before this
commit, the to-be-hashed expressions referenced inner/outer as
appropriate for the HashJoin, not Hash. That didn't have obvious bad
consequences, because the slots containing the tuples were put into
ecxt_innertuple when hashing a tuple for HashState (even though Hash
doesn't have an inner plan).
There are less common cases where this can cause visible problems
however (rather than just confusion when inspecting such executor
trees). E.g. "ERROR: bogus varno: 65000", when explaining queries
containing a HashJoin where the subsidiary Hash node's hash keys
reference a subplan. While normally hashkeys aren't displayed by
EXPLAIN, if one of those expressions references a subplan, that
subplan may be printed as part of the Hash node - which then failed
because an inner plan was referenced, and Hash doesn't have that.
It seems quite possible that there's other broken cases, too.
Fix the problem by properly splitting the expression for the HashJoin
and Hash nodes at plan time, and have them reference the proper
subsidiary node. While other workarounds are possible, fixing this
correctly seems easy enough. It was a pretty ugly hack to have
ExecInitHashJoin put the expression into the already initialized
HashState, in the first place.
I decided to not just split inner/outer hashkeys inside
make_hashjoin(), but also to separate out hashoperators and
hashcollations at plan time. Otherwise we would have ended up having
two very similar loops, one at plan time and the other during executor
startup. The work seems to more appropriately belong to plan time,
anyway.
Reported-By: Nikita Glukhov, Alexander Korotkov
Author: Andres Freund
Reviewed-By: Tom Lane, in an earlier version
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPpHfdvGVegF_TKKRiBrSmatJL2dR9uwFCuR+teQ_8tEXU8mxg@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 12-
|
|
When copying the definition of an index rebuilt concurrently for the new
entry, the index information was taken directly from the old index using
the relation cache. In this case, predicates and expressions have
some post-processing to prepare things for the planner, which loses some
information including the collations added in any of them.
This inconsistency can cause issues when attempting for example a table
rewrite, and makes the new indexes rebuilt concurrently inconsistent
with the old entries.
In order to fix the problem, fetch expressions and predicates directly
from the catalog of the old entry, and fill in IndexInfo for the new
index with that. This makes the process more consistent with
DefineIndex(), and the code is refactored with the addition of a routine
to create an IndexInfo node.
Reported-by: Manuel Rigger
Author: Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+u7OA5Hp0ra235F3czPom_FyAd-3+XwSJmX95r1+sRPOJc9VQ@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 12
|
|
Author: Alexander Lakhin
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/af27d1b3-a128-9d62-46e0-88f424397f44@gmail.com
|
|
As of commit e5253fdc, it is no longer true that the leader always
executes the subplan of a Gather Merge node. Remove comment to that
effect.
Back-patch to 11.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA%2BhUKGJEaZJYezXAOutuiWT%2BfxCA44%2BoKtVPAND2ubLiigR%3D-w%40mail.gmail.com
|
|
One would have needed out-of-tree code to observe the defects. Remove
unreferenced fields instead of completing their support functions.
Since in-tree code can't reach _readIntoClause(), no catversion bump.
|
|
We used the same slot to store a tuple from the index, and to store a
tuple from the table. That's not OK. It worked with the heap, because
heapam_getnextslot() stores a HeapTuple to the slot, and doesn't care how
large the tts_values/nulls arrays are. But when I played with a toy table
AM implementation that used a virtual tuple, it caused memory overruns.
In the passing, tidy up comments on the ioss_PscanLen fields.
|
|
Author: Andrea Gelmini
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier, Justin Pryzby
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190528181718.GA39034@glet
|
|
Switch to 2.1 version of pg_bsd_indent. This formats
multiline function declarations "correctly", that is with
additional lines of parameter declarations indented to match
where the first line's left parenthesis is.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=0P3FeTXRcU5B2W3jv3PgRVZ-kGUXLGfd42FFhUROO3ug@mail.gmail.com
|
|
This is still using the 2.0 version of pg_bsd_indent.
I thought it would be good to commit this separately,
so as to document the differences between 2.0 and 2.1 behavior.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16296.1558103386@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
|
Previously, gen_partprune_steps() always built executor pruning steps
using all suitable clauses, including those containing PARAM_EXEC
Params. This meant that the pruning steps were only completely safe
for executor run-time (scan start) pruning. To prune at executor
startup, we had to ignore the steps involving exec Params. But this
doesn't really work in general, since there may be logic changes
needed as well --- for example, pruning according to the last operator's
btree strategy is the wrong thing if we're not applying that operator.
The rules embodied in gen_partprune_steps() and its minions are
sufficiently complicated that tracking their incremental effects in
other logic seems quite impractical.
Short of a complete redesign, the only safe fix seems to be to run
gen_partprune_steps() twice, once to create executor startup pruning
steps and then again for run-time pruning steps. We can save a few
cycles however by noting during the first scan whether we rejected
any clauses because they involved exec Params --- if not, we don't
need to do the second scan.
In support of this, refactor the internal APIs in partprune.c to make
more use of passing information in the GeneratePruningStepsContext
struct, rather than as separate arguments.
This is, I hope, the last piece of our response to a bug report from
Alan Jackson. Back-patch to v11 where this code came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/FAD28A83-AC73-489E-A058-2681FA31D648@tvsquared.com
|
|
Author: Stephen Amell
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/539fa271-21b3-777e-a468-d96cffe9c768@gmail.com
|
|
|
|
Commit ca4103025dfe left a few loose ends. The most important one
(broken pg_dump output) is already fixed by virtue of commit
3b23552ad8bb, but some things remained:
* When ALTER TABLE rewrites tables, the indexes must remain in the
tablespace they were originally in. This didn't work because
index recreation during ALTER TABLE runs manufactured SQL (yuck),
which runs afoul of default_tablespace in competition with the parent
relation tablespace. To fix, reset default_tablespace to the empty
string temporarily, and add the TABLESPACE clause as appropriate.
* Setting a partitioned rel's tablespace to the database default is
confusing; if it worked, it would direct the partitions to that
tablespace regardless of default_tablespace. But in reality it does
not work, and making it work is a larger project. Therefore, throw
an error when this condition is detected, to alert the unwary.
Add some docs and tests, too.
Author: Álvaro Herrera
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f_1c260nOt_vBJ067AZ3JXptXVRohDVMLEBmudX1YEx-A@mail.gmail.com
|
|
Commit e439c6f0c removed IndexStmt.relationId, but not the comment
that had been added to explain it. Said comment was therefore
very confusing.
|
|
Up to now, DefineIndex() was responsible for adding attnotnull constraints
to the columns of a primary key, in any case where it hadn't been
convenient for transformIndexConstraint() to mark those columns as
is_not_null. It (or rather its minion index_check_primary_key) did this
by executing an ALTER TABLE SET NOT NULL command for the target table.
The trouble with this solution is that if we're creating the index due
to ALTER TABLE ADD PRIMARY KEY, and the outer ALTER TABLE has additional
sub-commands, the inner ALTER TABLE's operations executed at the wrong
time with respect to the outer ALTER TABLE's operations. In particular,
the inner ALTER would perform a validation scan at a point where the
table's storage might be inconsistent with its catalog entries. (This is
on the hairy edge of being a security problem, but AFAICS it isn't one
because the inner scan would only be interested in the tuples' null
bitmaps.) This can result in unexpected failures, such as the one seen
in bug #15580 from Allison Kaptur.
To fix, let's remove the attempt to do SET NOT NULL from DefineIndex(),
reducing index_check_primary_key's role to verifying that the columns are
already not null. (It shouldn't ever see such a case, but it seems wise
to keep the check for safety.) Instead, make transformIndexConstraint()
generate ALTER TABLE SET NOT NULL subcommands to be executed ahead of
the ADD PRIMARY KEY operation in every case where it can't force the
column to be created already-not-null. This requires only minor surgery
in parse_utilcmd.c, and it makes for a much more satisfying spec for
transformIndexConstraint(): it's no longer having to take it on faith
that someone else will handle addition of NOT NULL constraints.
To make that work, we have to move the execution of AT_SetNotNull into
an ALTER pass that executes ahead of AT_PASS_ADD_INDEX. I moved it to
AT_PASS_COL_ATTRS, and put that after AT_PASS_ADD_COL to avoid failure
when the column is being added in the same command. This incidentally
fixes a bug in the only previous usage of AT_PASS_COL_ATTRS, for
AT_SetIdentity: it didn't work either for a newly-added column.
Playing around with this exposed a separate bug in ALTER TABLE ONLY ...
ADD PRIMARY KEY for partitioned tables. The intent of the ONLY modifier
in that context is to prevent doing anything that would require holding
lock for a long time --- but the implied SET NOT NULL would recurse to
the child partitions, and do an expensive validation scan for any child
where the column(s) were not already NOT NULL. To fix that, invent a
new ALTER subcommand AT_CheckNotNull that just insists that a child
column be already NOT NULL, and apply that, not AT_SetNotNull, when
recursing to children in this scenario. This results in a slightly laxer
definition of ALTER TABLE ONLY ... SET NOT NULL for partitioned tables,
too: that command will now work as long as all children are already NOT
NULL, whereas before it just threw up its hands if there were any
partitions.
In passing, clean up the API of generateClonedIndexStmt(): remove a
useless argument, ensure that the output argument is not left undefined,
update the header comment.
A small side effect of this change is that no-such-column errors in ALTER
TABLE ADD PRIMARY KEY now produce a different message that includes the
table name, because they are now detected by the SET NOT NULL step which
has historically worded its error that way. That seems fine to me, so
I didn't make any effort to avoid the wording change.
The basic bug #15580 is of very long standing, and these other bugs
aren't new in v12 either. However, this is a pretty significant change
in the way ALTER TABLE ADD PRIMARY KEY works. On balance it seems best
not to back-patch, at least not till we get some more confidence that
this patch has no new bugs.
Patch by me, but thanks to Jie Zhang for a preliminary version.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15580-d1a6de5a3d65da51@postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1396E95157071C4EBBA51892C5368521017F2E6E63@G08CNEXMBPEKD02.g08.fujitsu.local
|
|
For amcanreorderby scans the nodeIndexscan.c's reorder queue holds
heap tuples, but the underlying table likely does not. Before this fix
we'd return different types of slots, depending on whether the tuple
came from the reorder queue, or from the index + table.
While that could be fixed by signalling that the node doesn't return a
fixed type of slot, it seems better to instead remove the separate
slot for the reorder queue, and use ExecForceStoreHeapTuple() to store
tuples from the queue. It's not particularly common to need
reordering, after all.
This reverts most of the iss_ReorderQueueSlot related changes to
nodeIndexscan.c made in 1a0586de3657cd3, except that now
ExecForceStoreHeapTuple() is used instead of ExecStoreHeapTuple().
Noticed when testing zheap against the in-core version of tableam.
Author: Andres Freund
|
|
If we need ordered output from a scan of a partitioned table, but
the ordering matches the partition ordering, then we don't need to
use a MergeAppend to combine the pre-ordered per-partition scan
results: a plain Append will produce the same results. This
both saves useless comparison work inside the MergeAppend proper,
and allows us to start returning tuples after istarting up just
the first child node not all of them.
However, all is not peaches and cream, because if some of the
child nodes have high startup costs then there will be big
discontinuities in the tuples-returned-versus-elapsed-time curve.
The planner's cost model cannot handle that (yet, anyway).
If we model the Append's startup cost as being just the first
child's startup cost, we may drastically underestimate the cost
of fetching slightly more tuples than are available from the first
child. Since we've had bad experiences with over-optimistic choices
of "fast start" plans for ORDER BY LIMIT queries, that seems scary.
As a klugy workaround, set the startup cost estimate for an ordered
Append to be the sum of its children's startup costs (as MergeAppend
would). This doesn't really describe reality, but it's less likely
to cause a bad plan choice than an underestimated startup cost would.
In practice, the cases where we really care about this optimization
will have child plans that are IndexScans with zero startup cost,
so that the overly conservative estimate is still just zero.
David Rowley, reviewed by Julien Rouhaud and Antonin Houska
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f-hAqhPLRk_RaSFTgYxd=Tz5hA7kQ2h4-DhJufQk8TGuw@mail.gmail.com
|
|
This adds table_multi_insert(), and converts COPY FROM, the only user
of heap_multi_insert, to it.
A simple conversion of COPY FROM use slots would have yielded a
slowdown when inserting into a partitioned table for some
workloads. Different partitions might need different slots (both slot
types and their descriptors), and dropping / creating slots when
there's constant partition changes is measurable.
Thus instead revamp the COPY FROM buffering for partitioned tables to
allow to buffer inserts into multiple tables, flushing only when
limits are reached across all partition buffers. By only dropping
slots when there've been inserts into too many different partitions,
the aforementioned overhead is gone. By allowing larger batches, even
when there are frequent partition changes, we actuall speed such cases
up significantly.
By using slots COPY of very narrow rows into unlogged / temporary
might slow down very slightly (due to the indirect function calls).
Author: David Rowley, Andres Freund, Haribabu Kommi
Discussion:
https://postgr.es/m/20180703070645.wchpu5muyto5n647@alap3.anarazel.de
https://postgr.es/m/20190327054923.t3epfuewxfqdt22e@alap3.anarazel.de
|
|
The upper-planner pathification allows FDWs to arrange to push down
different types of upper-stage operations to the remote side. This
commit teaches postgres_fdw to do it for the (FINAL, NULL) upperrel,
which is responsible for doing LockRows, LIMIT, and/or ModifyTable.
This provides the ability for postgres_fdw to handle SELECT commands
so that it 1) skips the LockRows step (if any) (note that this is
safe since it performs early locking) and 2) pushes down the LIMIT
and/or OFFSET restrictions (if any) to the remote side. This doesn't
handle the INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE cases.
Author: Etsuro Fujita
Reviewed-By: Antonin Houska and Jeff Janes
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87pnz1aby9.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
|
|
This moves bitmap heap scan support to below an optional tableam
callback. It's optional as the whole concept of bitmap heapscans is
fairly block specific.
This basically moves the work previously done in bitgetpage() into the
new scan_bitmap_next_block callback, and the direct poking into the
buffer done in BitmapHeapNext() into the new scan_bitmap_next_tuple()
callback.
The abstraction is currently somewhat leaky because
nodeBitmapHeapscan.c's prefetching and visibilitymap based logic
remains - it's likely that we'll later have to move more into the
AM. But it's not trivial to do so without introducing a significant
amount of code duplication between the AMs, so that's a project for
later.
Note that now nodeBitmapHeapscan.c and the associated node types are a
bit misnamed. But it's not clear whether renaming wouldn't be a cure
worse than the disease. Either way, that'd be best done in a separate
commit.
Author: Andres Freund
Reviewed-By: Robert Haas (in an older version)
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180703070645.wchpu5muyto5n647@alap3.anarazel.de
|
|
This moves sample scan support to below tableam. It's not optional as
there is, in contrast to e.g. bitmap heap scans, no alternative way to
perform tablesample queries. If an AM can't deal with the block based
API, it will have to throw an ERROR.
The tableam callbacks for this are block based, but given the current
TsmRoutine interface, that seems to be required.
The new interface doesn't require TsmRoutines to perform visibility
checks anymore - that requires the TsmRoutine to know details about
the AM, which we want to avoid. To continue to allow taking the
returned number of tuples account SampleScanState now has a donetuples
field (which previously e.g. existed in SystemRowsSamplerData), which
is only incremented after the visibility check succeeds.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180703070645.wchpu5muyto5n647@alap3.anarazel.de
|
|
Previously, the planner created RangeTblEntry and RelOptInfo structs
for every partition of a partitioned table, even though many of them
might later be deemed uninteresting thanks to partition pruning logic.
This incurred significant overhead when there are many partitions.
Arrange to postpone creation of these data structures until after
we've processed the query enough to identify restriction quals for
the partitioned table, and then apply partition pruning before not
after creation of each partition's data structures. In this way
we need not open the partition relations at all for partitions that
the planner has no real interest in.
For queries that can be proven at plan time to access only a small
number of partitions, this patch improves the practical maximum
number of partitions from under 100 to perhaps a few thousand.
Amit Langote, reviewed at various times by Dilip Kumar, Jesper Pedersen,
Yoshikazu Imai, and David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9d7c5112-cb99-6a47-d3be-cf1ee6862a1d@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
|
This is an SQL-standard feature that allows creating columns that are
computed from expressions rather than assigned, similar to a view or
materialized view but on a column basis.
This implements one kind of generated column: stored (computed on
write). Another kind, virtual (computed on read), is planned for the
future, and some room is left for it.
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Reviewed-by: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/b151f851-4019-bdb1-699e-ebab07d2f40a@2ndquadrant.com
|
|
This adds the CONCURRENTLY option to the REINDEX command. A REINDEX
CONCURRENTLY on a specific index creates a new index (like CREATE
INDEX CONCURRENTLY), then renames the old index away and the new index
in place and adjusts the dependencies, and then drops the old
index (like DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY). The REINDEX command also has
the capability to run its other variants (TABLE, DATABASE) with the
CONCURRENTLY option (but not SYSTEM).
The reindexdb command gets the --concurrently option.
Author: Michael Paquier, Andreas Karlsson, Peter Eisentraut
Reviewed-by: Andres Freund, Fujii Masao, Jim Nasby, Sergei Kornilov
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/60052986-956b-4478-45ed-8bd119e9b9cf%402ndquadrant.com#74948a1044c56c5e817a5050f554ddee
|
