This adds a second standard channel binding type for SCRAM. It is
mainly intended for third-party clients that cannot implement
tls-unique, for example JDBC.
Author: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Add some infrastructure (mostly macros) to make it easier to write
typical cases for constant-expression simplification. Add simplification
processing for ArrayRef, RowExpr, and ScalarArrayOpExpr node types,
which formerly went unsimplified even if all their inputs were constants.
Also teach it to simplify FieldSelect from a composite constant.
Make use of the new infrastructure to reduce the amount of code needed
for the existing ArrayExpr and ArrayCoerceExpr cases.
One existing test case changes output as a result of the fact that
RowExpr can now be folded to a constant. All the new code is exercised
by existing test cases according to gcov, so I feel no need to add
additional tests.
Tom Lane, reviewed by Dmitry Dolgov
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3be3b82c-e29c-b674-2163-bf47d98817b1@iki.fi
While ldaptls=1 provides an RFC 4513 conforming way to do LDAP
authentication with TLS encryption, there was an earlier de facto
standard way to do LDAP over SSL called LDAPS. Even though it's not
enshrined in a standard, it's still widely used and sometimes required
by organizations' network policies. There seems to be no reason not to
support it when available in the client library. Therefore, add support
when using OpenLDAP 2.4+ or Windows. It can be configured with
ldapscheme=ldaps or ldapurl=ldaps://...
Add tests for both ways of requesting LDAPS and a test for the
pre-existing ldaptls=1. Modify the 001_auth.pl test for "diagnostic
messages", which was previously relying on the server rejecting
ldaptls=1.
Author: Thomas Munro
Reviewed-By: Peter Eisentraut
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=1s+pA-LZUjQ-9GQz0Z4rX_eK=DFXAF1nBQ+ROPimuOYQ@mail.gmail.com
Multiple sessions doing CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY simultaneously are
supposed to be able to work in parallel, as evidenced by fixes in commit
c3d09b3bd2 specifically to support this case. In reality, one of the
sessions would be aborted by a misterious "deadlock detected" error.
Jeff Janes diagnosed that this is because of leftover snapshots used for
system catalog scans -- this was broken by 8aa3e47510 keeping track of
(registering) the catalog snapshot. To fix the deadlocks, it's enough
to de-register that snapshot prior to waiting.
Backpatch to 9.4, which introduced MVCC catalog scans.
Include an isolationtester spec that 8 out of 10 times reproduces the
deadlock with the unpatched code for me (Álvaro).
Author: Jeff Janes
Diagnosed-by: Jeff Janes
Reported-by: Jeremy Finzel
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMa1XUhHjCv8Qkx0WOr1Mpm_R4qxN26EibwCrj0Oor2YBUFUTg%40mail.gmail.com
Otherwise, the test fails with "Timed out while waiting for standby to
catch up". This happened rarely, perhaps only when autovacuum wrote WAL
between our choosing the recovery target and choosing the LSN to await.
Commit b26f7fa6ae fixed one case of this.
Fix two more. Back-patch to 9.6, which introduced the affected test.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180101055227.GA2952815@rfd.leadboat.com
I noticed that our code coverage report showed considerable deficiency
in test coverage for PL/pgSQL control statements. Notably, both
exec_stmt_block and most of the loop control statements had very poor
coverage of handling of return/exit/continue result codes from their
child statements; and exec_stmt_fori was seriously lacking in feature
coverage, having no test that exercised its BY or REVERSE features,
nor verification that its overflow defenses work.
Now that we have some infrastructure for plpgsql-specific test scripts,
the natural thing to do is make a new script rather than further extend
plpgsql.sql. So I created a new script plpgsql_control.sql with the
charter to test plpgsql control structures, and moved a few existing
tests there because they fell entirely under that charter. I then
added new test cases that exercise the bits of code complained of above.
Of the five kinds of loop statements, only exec_stmt_while's result code
handling is fully exercised by these tests. That would be a deficiency
as things stand, but a follow-on commit will merge the loop statements'
result code handling into one implementation. So testing each usage of
that implementation separately seems redundant.
In passing, also add a couple test cases to plpgsql.sql to more fully
exercise plpgsql's code related to expanded arrays --- I had thought
that area was sufficiently covered already, but the coverage report
showed a couple of un-executed code paths.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/26314.1514670401@sss.pgh.pa.us
Polygon opclass uses compress method feature of SP-GiST added earlier. For now
it's a single operator class which uses this feature. SP-GiST actually indexes
a bounding boxes of input polygons, so part of supported operations are lossy.
Opclass uses most methods of corresponding opclass over boxes of SP-GiST and
treats bounding boxes as point in 4D-space.
Bump catalog version.
Authors: Nikita Glukhov, Alexander Korotkov with minor editorization by me
Reviewed-By: all authors + Darafei Praliaskouski
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/54907069.1030506@sigaev.ru
Since 9.4, we've allowed the syntax "select union select" and variants
of that. However, the planner wasn't expecting a no-column set operation
and ended up treating the set operation as if it were UNION ALL.
Turns out it's trivial to fix in v10 and later; we just need to be careful
about not generating a Sort node with no sort keys. However, since a weird
corner case like this is never going to be exercised by developers, we'd
better have thorough regression tests if we want to consider it supported.
Per report from Victor Yegorov.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAGnEbojGJrRSOgJwNGM7JSJZpVAf8xXcVPbVrGdhbVEHZ-BUMw@mail.gmail.com
Various Perl scripts we use to generate files were in the habit of
printing things like "generated by $0" into their output files.
That looks like a fine idea at first glance, but it results in
non-reproducible output, because in VPATH builds $0 won't be just
the name of the script file, but a full path for it. We'd prefer
that you get identical results whether using VPATH or not, so this
is a bad thing.
Some of these places also printed their input file name(s), causing
an additional hazard of the same type.
Hence, establish a policy that thou shalt not print $0, nor input file
pathnames, into output files (they're still allowed in error messages,
though). Instead just write the script name verbatim. While we are at
it, we can make these annotations more useful by giving the script's
full relative path name within the PG source tree, eg instead of
Gen_fmgrtab.pl let's print src/backend/utils/Gen_fmgrtab.pl.
Not all of the changes made here actually affect any files shipped
in finished tarballs today, but it seems best to apply the policy
everyplace so that nobody copies unsafe code into places where it
could matter.
Christoph Berg and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20171215102223.GB31812@msg.df7cb.de
Introduce parallel-aware hash joins that appear in EXPLAIN plans as Parallel
Hash Join with Parallel Hash. While hash joins could already appear in
parallel queries, they were previously always parallel-oblivious and had a
partial subplan only on the outer side, meaning that the work of the inner
subplan was duplicated in every worker.
After this commit, the planner will consider using a partial subplan on the
inner side too, using the Parallel Hash node to divide the work over the
available CPU cores and combine its results in shared memory. If the join
needs to be split into multiple batches in order to respect work_mem, then
workers process different batches as much as possible and then work together
on the remaining batches.
The advantages of a parallel-aware hash join over a parallel-oblivious hash
join used in a parallel query are that it:
* avoids wasting memory on duplicated hash tables
* avoids wasting disk space on duplicated batch files
* divides the work of building the hash table over the CPUs
One disadvantage is that there is some communication between the participating
CPUs which might outweigh the benefits of parallelism in the case of small
hash tables. This is avoided by the planner's existing reluctance to supply
partial plans for small scans, but it may be necessary to estimate
synchronization costs in future if that situation changes. Another is that
outer batch 0 must be written to disk if multiple batches are required.
A potential future advantage of parallel-aware hash joins is that right and
full outer joins could be supported, since there is a single set of matched
bits for each hashtable, but that is not yet implemented.
A new GUC enable_parallel_hash is defined to control the feature, defaulting
to on.
Author: Thomas Munro
Reviewed-By: Andres Freund, Robert Haas
Tested-By: Rafia Sabih, Prabhat Sahu
Discussion:
https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=2W=cOkiZxcg6qiFQP-dHUe09aqTrEMM7yJDrHMhDv_RA@mail.gmail.comhttps://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=37HKyJ4U6XOLi=JgfSHM3o6B-GaeO-6hkOmneTDkH+Uw@mail.gmail.com
When a Gather or Gather Merge node is started and stopped multiple
times, accumulate instrumentation data only once, at the end, instead
of after each execution, to avoid recording inflated totals.
Commit 778e78ae9f, the previous attempt
at a fix, instead reset the state after every execution, which worked
for the general instrumentation data but had problems for the additional
instrumentation specific to Sort and Hash nodes.
Report by hubert depesz lubaczewski. Analysis and fix by Amit Kapila,
following a design proposal from Thomas Munro, with a comment tweak
by me.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/20171127175631.GA405@depesz.com
This parameter can be used to enforce the channel binding type used
during a SCRAM authentication. This can be useful to check code paths
where an invalid channel binding type is used by a client and will be
even more useful to allow testing other channel binding types when they
are added.
The default value is tls-unique, which is what RFC 5802 specifies.
Clients can optionally specify an empty value, which has as effect to
not use channel binding and use SCRAM-SHA-256 as chosen SASL mechanism.
More tests for SCRAM and channel binding are added to the SSL test
suite.
Author: Author: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Don't write to stdin of a psql process that could have already exited
with an authentication failure. Buildfarm members crake and mandrill
have failed once by doing so. Ignore SIGPIPE in all TAP tests.
Back-patch to v10, where these tests were introduced.
Reviewed by Michael Paquier.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20171209210203.GC3362632@rfd.leadboat.com
Previously it was possible that a tuple was not pruned during vacuum,
even though its update xmax (i.e. the updating xid in a multixact with
both key share lockers and an updater) was below the cutoff horizon.
As the freezing code assumed, rightly so, that that's not supposed to
happen, xmax would be preserved (as a member of a new multixact or
xmax directly). That causes two problems: For one the tuple is below
the xmin horizon, which can cause problems if the clog is truncated or
once there's an xid wraparound. The bigger problem is that that will
break HOT chains, which in turn can lead two to breakages: First,
failing index lookups, which in turn can e.g lead to constraints being
violated. Second, future hot prunes / vacuums can end up making
invisible tuples visible again. There's other harmful scenarios.
Fix the problem by recognizing that tuples can be DEAD instead of
RECENTLY_DEAD, even if the multixactid has alive members, if the
update_xid is below the xmin horizon. That's safe because newer
versions of the tuple will contain the locking xids.
A followup commit will harden the code somewhat against future similar
bugs and already corrupted data.
Author: Andres Freund, with changes by Alvaro Herrera
Reported-By: Daniel Wood
Analyzed-By: Andres Freund, Alvaro Herrera, Robert Haas, Peter
Geoghegan, Daniel Wood, Yi Wen Wong, Michael Paquier
Reviewed-By: Alvaro Herrera, Robert Haas, Michael Paquier
Discussion:
https://postgr.es/m/E5711E62-8FDF-4DCA-A888-C200BF6B5742@amazon.comhttps://postgr.es/m/20171102112019.33wb7g5wp4zpjelu@alap3.anarazel.de
Backpatch: 9.3-
The plpgsql.sql test file in the main regression tests is now by far the
largest after numeric_big, making editing and managing the test cases
very cumbersome. The other PLs have their own test suites split up into
smaller files by topic. It would be nice to have that for plpgsql as
well. So, to get that started, set up test infrastructure in
src/pl/plpgsql/src/ and split out the recently added procedure test
cases into a new file there. That file now mirrors the test cases added
to the other PLs, making managing those matching tests a bit easier too.
msvc build system changes with help from Michael Paquier
The test added by commit 390d58135 turns out to have different output
in CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS builds: there's an extra CONTEXT line in the
error message as a result of detecting the error at a different place.
Possibly we should do something to make that more consistent. But as
a stopgap measure to make the buildfarm green again, adjust the test
to suppress CONTEXT entirely. We can revert this if we do something
in the backend to eliminate the inconsistency.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/31545.1512924904@sss.pgh.pa.us
If one exits and re-enters a DECLARE ... BEGIN ... END block within a
single execution of a plpgsql function, perhaps due to a surrounding loop,
the declared variables are supposed to get re-initialized to null (or
whatever their initializer is). But this failed to happen for variables
of type "record", because while exec_stmt_block() expected such variables
to be included in the block's initvarnos list, plpgsql_add_initdatums()
only adds DTYPE_VAR variables to that list. This bug appears to have
been there since the aboriginal addition of plpgsql to our tree.
Fix by teaching plpgsql_add_initdatums() to include DTYPE_REC variables
as well. (We don't need to consider other DTYPEs because they don't
represent separately-stored values.) I failed to resist the temptation
to make some nearby cosmetic adjustments, too.
No back-patch, because there have not been field complaints, and it
seems possible that somewhere out there someone has code depending
on the incorrect behavior. In any case this change would have no
impact on correctly-written code.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/22994.1512800671@sss.pgh.pa.us
Those cases currently crash and supporting them is more work then
originally thought, so we'll just prohibit these scenarios for now.
Author: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Reported-by: Мансур Галиев <gomer94@yandex.ru>
Bug: #14866
A COPY into a table should apply identity sequence values just like it
does for ordinary defaults. This was previously forgotten, leading to
null values being inserted, which in turn would fail because identity
columns have not-null constraints.
Author: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Steven Winfield <steven.winfield@cantabcapital.com>
Bug: #14952
I suppose it is a copy-and-paste error that this test doesn't actually
test the "Parallel Append with both partial and non-partial subplans"
case (EXPLAIN alone surely doesn't qualify as a test of executor
behavior). Fix that.
Also, add cosmetic aliases to make it possible to tell apart these
otherwise-identical test cases in log_statement output.
When we create an Append node, we can spread out the workers over the
subplans instead of piling on to each subplan one at a time, which
should typically be a bit more efficient, both because the startup
cost of any plan executed entirely by one worker is paid only once and
also because of reduced contention. We can also construct Append
plans using a mix of partial and non-partial subplans, which may allow
for parallelism in places that otherwise couldn't support it.
Unfortunately, this patch doesn't handle the important case of
parallelizing UNION ALL by running each branch in a separate worker;
the executor infrastructure is added here, but more planner work is
needed.
Amit Khandekar, Robert Haas, Amul Sul, reviewed and tested by
Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Langote, Rafia Sabih, Amit Kapila, and
Rajkumar Raghuwanshi.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAJ3gD9dy0K_E8r727heqXoBmWZ83HwLFwdcaSSmBQ1+S+vRuUQ@mail.gmail.com
When a Gather or Gather Merge node is started and stopped multiple
times, the old code wouldn't reset the shared state between executions,
potentially resulting in dramatically inflated instrumentation data
for nodes beneath it. (The per-worker instrumentation ended up OK,
I think, but the overall totals were inflated.)
Report by hubert depesz lubaczewski. Analysis and fix by Amit Kapila,
reviewed and tweaked a bit by me.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/20171127175631.GA405@depesz.com
If a hash join appears in a parallel query, there may be no hash table
available for explain.c to inspect even though a hash table may have
been built in other processes. This could happen either because
parallel_leader_participation was set to off or because the leader
happened to hit the end of the outer relation immediately (even though
the complete relation is not empty) and decided not to build the hash
table.
Commit bf11e7ee introduced a way for workers to exchange
instrumentation via the DSM segment for Sort nodes even though they
are not parallel-aware. This commit does the same for Hash nodes, so
that explain.c has a way to find instrumentation data from an
arbitrary participant that actually built the hash table.
Author: Thomas Munro
Reviewed-By: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm%3D3DUQC2-z252N55eOcZBer6DPdM%3DFzrxH9dZc5vYLsjaA%40mail.gmail.com
Hopefully, the additional logging will help avoid confusion that
could otherwise result.
Nathan Bossart, reviewed by Michael Paquier, Fabrízio Mello, and me
Without this, when partdesc->nparts == 0, we end up calling
ExecBuildSlotPartitionKeyDescription without initializing values
and isnull.
Reported by Coverity via Michael Paquier. Patch by Michael Paquier,
reviewed and revised by Amit Langote.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAB7nPqQ3mwkdMoPY-ocgTpPnjd8TKOadMxdTtMLvEzF8480Zfg@mail.gmail.com
This adds a new object type "procedure" that is similar to a function
but does not have a return type and is invoked by the new CALL statement
instead of SELECT or similar. This implementation is aligned with the
SQL standard and compatible with or similar to other SQL implementations.
This commit adds new commands CALL, CREATE/ALTER/DROP PROCEDURE, as well
as ALTER/DROP ROUTINE that can refer to either a function or a
procedure (or an aggregate function, as an extension to SQL). There is
also support for procedures in various utility commands such as COMMENT
and GRANT, as well as support in pg_dump and psql. Support for defining
procedures is available in all the languages supplied by the core
distribution.
While this commit is mainly syntax sugar around existing functionality,
future features will rely on having procedures as a separate object
type.
Reviewed-by: Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>
Invoking the Makefile without an explicit target was building every
possible target instead of just the "all" target. Back-patch to 9.3
(all supported versions).
Previously, this function estimated the selectivity as 1 minus eqjoinsel()
for the negator equality operator, regardless of join type (I think there
was an expectation that eqjoinsel would handle the join type). But
actually this is completely wrong for semijoin cases: the fraction of the
LHS that has a non-matching row is not one minus the fraction of the LHS
that has a matching row. In reality a semijoin with <> will nearly always
succeed: it can only fail when the RHS is empty, or it contains a single
distinct value that is equal to the particular LHS value, or the LHS value
is null. The only one of those things we should have much confidence in
estimating is the fraction of LHS values that are null, so let's just take
the selectivity as 1 minus outer nullfrac.
Per coding convention, antijoin should be estimated the same as semijoin.
Arguably this is a bug fix, but in view of the lack of field complaints
and the risk of destabilizing plans, no back-patch.
Thomas Munro, reviewed by Ashutosh Bapat
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=270ze2hVxWkJw-5eKzc3AB4C9KpH3L2kih75R5pdSogg@mail.gmail.com
Although hash joins are already tested by many queries, these tests
systematically cover the four different states we can reach as part of
the strategy for respecting work_mem.
Author: Thomas Munro
Reviewed-By: Andres Freund
Currently, partition pruning happens via constraint exclusion, but
there are pending places to replace that with a different and
hopefully faster mechanism. To be sure that we don't change behavior
without realizing it, add extensive test coverage.
Note that not all of these behaviors are optimal; in some cases,
partitions are not pruned even though it would be safe to do so.
These tests therefore serve to memorialize the current state rather
than the ideal state. Patches that improve things can update the test
results as appropriate.
Amit Langote, adjusted by me. Review and testing of the larger patch
set of which this is a part by Ashutosh Bapat, David Rowley, Dilip
Kumar, Jesper Pedersen, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Beena Emerson, Amul Sul,
and Kyotaro Horiguchi.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/098b9c71-1915-1a2a-8d52-1a7a50ce79e8@lab.ntt.co.jp
Non-default range partitions have a constraint which include null
tests, and both default and non-default list partitions also have a
constraint which includes null tests, but for some reason this was
missed for default range partitions. This could cause the partition
constraint to evaluate to false for rows that were (correctly) routed
to that partition by insert tuple routing, which could in turn
cause constraint exclusion to prune the default partition in cases
where it should not.
Amit Langote, reviewed by Kyotaro Horiguchi
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/ba7aaeb1-4399-220e-70b4-62eade1522d0@lab.ntt.co.jp
Doing this suppresses Coverity warnings and might allow improved
code in some cases. The prospects of that are not so bright as
to warrant back-patching, though.
Michael Paquier, per Coverity
When nodeValuesscan.c was written, it was impossible to have a SubPlan in
VALUES --- any sub-SELECT there would have to be uncorrelated and thereby
would produce an InitPlan instead. We therefore took a shortcut in the
logic that throws away a ValuesScan's per-row expression evaluation data
structures. This was broken by the introduction of LATERAL however; a
sub-SELECT containing a lateral reference produces a correlated SubPlan.
The cleanest fix for this would be to give up the optimization of
discarding the expression eval state. But that still seems pretty
unappetizing for long VALUES lists. It seems to work to just prevent
the subexpressions from hooking into the ValuesScan node's subPlan
list, so let's do that and see how well it works. (If this breaks,
due to additional connections between the subexpressions and the outer
query structures, we might consider compromises like throwing away data
only for VALUES rows not containing SubPlans.)
Per bug #14924 from Christian Duta. Back-patch to 9.3 where LATERAL
was introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20171124120836.1463.5310@wrigleys.postgresql.org
The query didn't really have a preferred index, leading to platform-
specific choices of which one to use. Adjust it to make sure tenk1_hundred
is always chosen.
Per buildfarm.
When strict aggregate combine functions, used in multi-stage/parallel
aggregation, returned NULL, we didn't check for that, invoking the
combine function with NULL the next round, despite it being strict.
The equivalent code invoking normal transition functions has a check
for that situation, which did not get copied in a7de3dc5c3. Fix the
bug by adding the equivalent check.
Based on a quick look I could not find any strict combine functions in
core actually returning NULL, and it doesn't seem very likely external
users have done so. So this isn't likely to have caused issues in
practice.
Add tests verifying transition / combine functions returning NULL is
tested.
Reported-By: Andres Freund
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20171121033642.7xvmjqrl4jdaaat3@alap3.anarazel.de
Backpatch: 9.6, where parallel aggregation was introduced
This hack closes a race condition in "make -j check-world" and "make -j
installcheck-world". Back-patch to v10, before which these parallel
invocations had worse problems.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20171106080752.GA1298146@rfd.leadboat.com
