PostgreSQL 13 and newer versions are directly impacted by that through
the SQL function normalize(), which would cause a call of this function
to write one byte past its allocation if using in input an empty
string after recomposing the string with NFC and NFKC. Older versions
(v10~v12) are not directly affected by this problem as the only code
path using normalization is SASLprep in SCRAM authentication that
forbids the case of an empty string, but let's make the code more robust
anyway there so as any out-of-core callers of this function are covered.
The solution chosen to fix this issue is simple, with the addition of a
fast-exit path if the decomposed string is found as empty. This would
only happen for an empty string as at its lowest level a codepoint would
be decomposed as itself if it has no entry in the decomposition table or
if it has a decomposition size of 0.
Some tests are added to cover this issue in v13~. Note that an empty
string has always been considered as normalized (grammar "IS NF[K]{C,D}
NORMALIZED", through the SQL function is_normalized()) for all the
operations allowed (NFC, NFD, NFKC and NFKD) since this feature has been
introduced as of 2991ac5. This behavior is unchanged but some tests are
added in v13~ to check after that.
I have also checked "make normalization-check" in src/common/unicode/,
while on it (works in 13~, and breaks in older stable branches
independently of this commit).
The release notes should just mention this commit for v13~.
Reported-by: Matthijs van der Vleuten
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17277-0c527a373794e802@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 10
clang-12 has introduced -Wcompound-token-split-by-macro, that is causing
a large amount of warnings when building PL/Perl because of its
interactions with upstream Perl. This commit adds one -Wno to CFLAGS at
./configure time if the flag is supported by the compiler to silence all
those warnings.
Upstream perl has fixed this issue, but it is going to take some time
before this is spread across the buildfarm, and we have noticed that
some animals would be useful with an extra -Werror to help with the
detection of incorrect placeholders (see b0cf544), dangomushi being
one.
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/YYr3qYa/R3Gw+Sbg@paquier.xyz
Backpatch-through: 10
protocol.sgml documented the layout for Type messages, but completely
dropped the ball otherwise, failing to explain what they are, when
they are sent, or what they're good for. While at it, do a little
copy-editing on the description of Relation messages.
In passing, adjust the comment for apply_handle_type() to make it
clearer that we choose not to do anything when receiving a Type
message, not that we think it has no use whatsoever.
Per question from Stefen Hillman.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPgW8pMknK5pup6=T4a_UG=Cz80Rgp=KONqJmTdHfaZb0RvnFg@mail.gmail.com
We've seen intermittent failures in this test on slower buildfarm
machines, which I think can be explained by assuming that autovacuum
emitted some additional WAL. Disable autovacuum to stabilize it.
In passing, use stringwise not numeric comparison to compare
WAL file names. Doesn't matter at present, but they are
hex strings not decimal ...
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1372189.1636499287@sss.pgh.pa.us
libpq collects up to a bufferload of data whenever it reads data from
the socket. When SSL or GSS encryption is requested during startup,
any additional data received with the server's yes-or-no reply
remained in the buffer, and would be treated as already-decrypted data
once the encryption handshake completed. Thus, a man-in-the-middle
with the ability to inject data into the TCP connection could stuff
some cleartext data into the start of a supposedly encryption-protected
database session.
This could probably be abused to inject faked responses to the
client's first few queries, although other details of libpq's behavior
make that harder than it sounds. A different line of attack is to
exfiltrate the client's password, or other sensitive data that might
be sent early in the session. That has been shown to be possible with
a server vulnerable to CVE-2021-23214.
To fix, throw a protocol-violation error if the internal buffer
is not empty after the encryption handshake.
Our thanks to Jacob Champion for reporting this problem.
Security: CVE-2021-23222
The server collects up to a bufferload of data whenever it reads data
from the client socket. When SSL or GSS encryption is requested
during startup, any additional data received with the initial
request message remained in the buffer, and would be treated as
already-decrypted data once the encryption handshake completed.
Thus, a man-in-the-middle with the ability to inject data into the
TCP connection could stuff some cleartext data into the start of
a supposedly encryption-protected database session.
This could be abused to send faked SQL commands to the server,
although that would only work if the server did not demand any
authentication data. (However, a server relying on SSL certificate
authentication might well not do so.)
To fix, throw a protocol-violation error if the internal buffer
is not empty after the encryption handshake.
Our thanks to Jacob Champion for reporting this problem.
Security: CVE-2021-23214
Currently, lastOverflowedXid is never reset. It's just adjusted on new
transactions known to be overflowed. But if there are no overflowed
transactions for a long time, snapshots could be mistakenly marked as
suboverflowed due to wraparound.
This commit fixes this issue by resetting lastOverflowedXid when needed
altogether with KnownAssignedXids.
Backpatch to all supported versions.
Reported-by: Stan Hu
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMBWrQ%3DFp5UAsU_nATY7EMY7NHczG4-DTDU%3DmCvBQZAQ6wa2xQ%40mail.gmail.com
Author: Kyotaro Horiguchi, Alexander Korotkov
Reviewed-by: Stan Hu, Simon Riggs, Nikolay Samokhvalov, Andrey Borodin, Dmitry Dolgov
When a role being dropped contains is referenced by catalog objects that
are concurrently also being dropped, a crash can result while trying to
construct the string that describes the objects. Suppress that by
ignoring objects whose descriptions are returned as NULL.
The majority of relevant codesites were already cautious about this
already; we had just missed a couple.
This is an old bug, so backpatch all the way back.
Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17126-21887f04508cb5c8@postgresql.org
If lo_export() fails to open the target file or to write to it, it leaks
the created LargeObjectDesc and its snapshot in the top-transaction
context and resource owner. That's pretty harmless, it's a small leak
after all, but it gives the user a "Snapshot reference leak" warning.
Fix by using a short-lived memory context and no resource owner for
transient LargeObjectDescs that are opened and closed within one function
call. The leak is easiest to reproduce with lo_export() on a directory
that doesn't exist, but in principle the other lo_* functions could also
fail.
Backpatch to all supported versions.
Reported-by: Andrew B
Reviewed-by: Alvaro Herrera
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/32bf767a-2d65-71c4-f170-122f416bab7e@iki.fi
This undoes a mistake in 1ec7679f1: domainval and domainnull were
meant to live across loop iterations, but they were incorrectly
moved inside the loop. The effect was only to emit useless extra
EEOP_MAKE_READONLY steps, so it's not a big deal; nonetheless,
back-patch to v13 where the mistake was introduced.
Ranier Vilela
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEudQAqXuhbkaAp-sGH6dR6Nsq7v28_0TPexHOm6FiDYqwQD-w@mail.gmail.com
As in commits 6301c3ada and e9d9ba2a4, avoid doing repetitive
list_delete_first() operations, since that would be expensive when
there are many files waiting to be unlinked. This is a slightly
larger change than in those cases. We have to keep the list state
valid for calls to AbsorbSyncRequests(), so it's necessary to invent a
"canceled" field instead of immediately deleting PendingUnlinkEntry
entries. Also, because we might not be able to process all the
entries, we need a new list primitive list_delete_first_n().
list_delete_first_n() is almost list_copy_tail(), but it modifies the
input List instead of making a new copy. I found a couple of existing
uses of the latter that could profitably use the new function. (There
might be more, but the other callers look like they probably shouldn't
overwrite the input List.)
As before, back-patch to v13.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CD2F0E7F-9822-45EC-A411-AE56F14DEA9F@amazon.com
In the same spirit as 6301c3ada, fix some more places where we were
using list_delete_first() in a loop and thereby risking O(N^2)
behavior. It's not clear that the lists manipulated in these spots
can get long enough to be really problematic ... but it's not clear
that they can't, either, and the fixes are simple enough.
As before, back-patch to v13.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CD2F0E7F-9822-45EC-A411-AE56F14DEA9F@amazon.com
Failing to do so results in inability of logical decoding to process the
WAL stream. Handle it by doing nothing.
Backpatch all the way back.
Reported-by: Petr Jelínek <petr.jelinek@enterprisedb.com>
The opclass parameter Datums from the old index are fetched in the same
way as for predicates and expressions, by grabbing them directly from
the system catalogs. They are then copied into the new IndexInfo that
will be used for the creation of the new copy.
This caused the new index to be rebuilt with default parameters rather
than the ones pre-defined by a user. The only way to get back a new
index with correct opclass parameters would be to recreate a new index
from scratch.
The issue has been introduced by 911e702.
Author: Michael Paquier
Reviewed-by: Zhihong Yu
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/YX0CG/QpLXcPr8HJ@paquier.xyz
Backpatch-through: 13
Windows fails on a request to read() more than INT_MAX bytes,
and perhaps other platforms could have similar issues. Let's
adjust this code to read at most 1GB per call.
(One would not have thought the file could get that big, but now
we have a field report of trouble, so it can. We likely ought to
add some mechanism to limit the size of the query-texts file
separately from the size of the hash table. That is not this
patch, though.)
Per bug #17254 from Yusuke Egashira. It's been like this for
awhile, so back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17254-a926c89dc03375c2@postgresql.org
When replaying a transaction that held many exclusive locks on the
primary, a standby server's startup process would expend O(N^2)
effort on manipulating the list of locks. This code was fine when
written, but commit 1cff1b95a made repetitive list_delete_first()
calls inefficient, as explained in its commit message. Fix by just
iterating the list normally, and releasing storage only when done.
(This'd be inadequate if we needed to recover from an error occurring
partway through; but we don't.)
Back-patch to v13 where 1cff1b95a came in.
Nathan Bossart
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CD2F0E7F-9822-45EC-A411-AE56F14DEA9F@amazon.com
DST law changes in Fiji, Jordan, Palestine, and Samoa. Historical
corrections for Barbados, Cook Islands, Guyana, Niue, Portugal, and
Tonga.
Also, the Pacific/Enderbury zone has been renamed to Pacific/Kanton.
The following zones have been merged into nearby, more-populous zones
whose clocks have agreed since 1970: Africa/Accra, America/Atikokan,
America/Blanc-Sablon, America/Creston, America/Curacao,
America/Nassau, America/Port_of_Spain, Antarctica/DumontDUrville,
and Antarctica/Syowa.
Commits fdd965d07 and 3cd9c3b92 tested CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY by
launching two separate pgbench runs concurrently. This was needed so
that only a single client thread would run CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY,
avoiding deadlock between two CICs. However, there's a better way,
which is to use an advisory lock to prevent concurrent CICs. That's
better in part because the test code is shorter and more readable, but
mostly because it automatically scales things to launch an appropriate
number of CICs relative to the number of INSERT transactions.
As committed, typically half to three-quarters of the CIC transactions
were pointless because the INSERT transactions had already stopped.
In passing, remove background_pgbench, which was added to support
these tests and isn't needed anymore. We can always put it back
if we find a use for it later.
Back-patch to v12; older pgbench versions lack the
conditional-execution features needed for this method.
Tom Lane and Andrey Borodin
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/139687.1635277318@sss.pgh.pa.us
The purpose of commit 8a54e12a38 was to
fix this, and it sufficed when the PREPARE TRANSACTION completed before
the CIC looked for lock conflicts. Otherwise, things still broke. As
before, in a cluster having used CIC while having enabled prepared
transactions, queries that use the resulting index can silently fail to
find rows. It may be necessary to reindex to recover from past
occurrences; REINDEX CONCURRENTLY suffices. Fix this for future index
builds by making CIC wait for arbitrarily-recent prepared transactions
and for ordinary transactions that may yet PREPARE TRANSACTION. As part
of that, have PREPARE TRANSACTION transfer locks to its dummy PGPROC
before it calls ProcArrayClearTransaction(). Back-patch to 9.6 (all
supported versions).
Andrey Borodin, reviewed (in earlier versions) by Andres Freund.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/01824242-AA92-4FE9-9BA7-AEBAFFEA3D0C@yandex-team.ru
CIC and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY assume backends see their catalog changes
no later than each backend's next transaction start. That failed to
hold when a backend absorbed a relevant invalidation in the middle of
running RelationBuildDesc() on the CIC index. Queries that use the
resulting index can silently fail to find rows. Fix this for future
index builds by making RelationBuildDesc() loop until it finishes
without accepting a relevant invalidation. It may be necessary to
reindex to recover from past occurrences; REINDEX CONCURRENTLY suffices.
Back-patch to 9.6 (all supported versions).
Noah Misch and Andrey Borodin, reviewed (in earlier versions) by Andres
Freund.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20210730022548.GA1940096@gust.leadboat.com
The documentation was imprecise about the starting LSN used for WAL
streaming if nothing can be found in the local archive directory
defined with the pg_receivewal command, so be more talkative on this
matter.
Extracted from a larger patch by the same author.
Author: Ronan Dunklau, Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18708360.4lzOvYHigE@aivenronan
Backpatch-through: 10
The code does not expect sh_error() to return, but the patch
that made this header usable in frontend didn't get that memo.
While here, plaster unlikely() on the tests that decide whether
to invoke sh_error(), and add our standard copyright notice.
Noted by Andres Freund. Back-patch to v13 where this frontend
support came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/0D54435C-1199-4361-9D74-2FBDCF8EA164@anarazel.de
Non-global default privilege entries should be dumped as-is,
not made relative to the default ACL for their object type.
This would typically only matter if one had revoked some
on-by-default privileges in a global entry, and then wanted
to grant them again in a non-global entry.
Per report from Boris Korzun. This is an old bug, so back-patch
to all supported branches.
Neil Chen, test case by Masahiko Sawada
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/111621616618184@mail.yandex.ru
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAA3qoJnr2+1dVJObNtfec=qW4Z0nz=A9+r5bZKoTSy5RDjskMw@mail.gmail.com
The build scripts of Visual Studio would fail to detect properly a 3.0.0
build as the check on the second digit was failing. This is adjusted
where needed, allowing the builds to complete. Note that the MSIs of
OpenSSL mentioned in the documentation have not changed any library
names for Win32 and Win64, making this change straight-forward.
Reported-by: htalaco, via github
Reviewed-by: Daniel Gustafsson
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/YW5XKYkq6k7OtrFq@paquier.xyz
Backpatch-through: 9.6
Commit 1b5d797cd4 intended to relax the lock level used to rename
indexes, but inadvertently allowed *any* relation to be renamed with a
lowered lock level, as long as the command is spelled ALTER INDEX.
That's undesirable for other relation types, so retry the operation with
the higher lock if the relation turns out not to be an index.
After this fix, ALTER INDEX <sometable> RENAME will require access
exclusive lock, which it didn't before.
Author: Nathan Bossart <bossartn@amazon.com>
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Reported-by: Onder Kalaci <onderk@microsoft.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/PH0PR21MB1328189E2821CDEC646F8178D8AE9@PH0PR21MB1328.namprd21.prod.outlook.com
ldapsearch's deprecated -h/-p arguments were removed, need to use -H now -
which has been around for over 20 years.
As perltidy insists on reflowing the parameters anyway, change order and
"phrasing" to yield a less confusing layout (per suggestion from Tom Lane).
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20211009233850.wvr6apcrw2ai6cnj@alap3.anarazel.de
Backpatch: 11-, where the tests were added.
An update such as "UPDATE ... SET fld[n].subfld = whatever"
failed if the array elements were domains rather than plain
composites. That's because isAssignmentIndirectionExpr()
failed to cope with the CoerceToDomain node that would appear
in the expression tree in this case. The result would typically
be a crash, and even if we accidentally didn't crash, we'd not
correctly preserve other fields of the same array element.
Per report from Onder Kalaci. Back-patch to v11 where arrays of
domains came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/PH0PR21MB132823A46AA36F0685B7A29AD8BD9@PH0PR21MB1328.namprd21.prod.outlook.com
I think when I added this assertion (in commit 8f889b108), I was only
thinking of the use of transformExpressionList at top level of INSERT
and VALUES. But it's also called by transformRowExpr(), which can
certainly occur in an UPDATE targetlist, so it's inappropriate to
suppose that p_multiassign_exprs must be empty. Besides, since the
input is not expected to contain ResTargets, there's no reason it
should contain MultiAssignRefs either. Hence this code need not
be concerned about the state of p_multiassign_exprs, and we should
just drop the assertion.
Per bug #17236 from ocean_li_996. It's been wrong for years,
so back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17236-3210de9bcba1d7ca@postgresql.org
If the blob TOC file cannot be parsed, the error message was failing
to print the filename as the variable holding it was shadowed by the
destination buffer for parsing. When the filename fails to parse,
the error will print an empty string:
./pg_restore -d foo -F d dump
pg_restore: error: invalid line in large object TOC file "": ..
..instead of the intended error message:
./pg_restore -d foo -F d dump
pg_restore: error: invalid line in large object TOC file "dump/blobs.toc": ..
Fix by renaming both variables as the shared name was too generic to
store either and still convey what the variable held.
Backpatch all the way down to 9.6.
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/A2B151F5-B32B-4F2C-BA4A-6870856D9BDE@yesql.se
Backpatch-through: 9.6
Make sure that the string parsing is limited by the size of the
destination buffer.
In pg_basebackup the available values sent from the server
is limited to two characters so there was no risk of overflow.
In pg_dump the buffer is bounded by MAXPGPATH, and thus the limit
must be inserted via preprocessor expansion and the buffer increased
by one to account for the terminator. There is no risk of overflow
here, since in this case, the buffer scanned is smaller than the
destination buffer.
Backpatch the pg_basebackup fix to 11 where it was introduced, and
the pg_dump fix all the way down to 9.6.
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/B14D3D7B-F98C-4E20-9459-C122C67647FB@yesql.se
Backpatch-through: 11 and 9.6
The grammar of this command run on indexes with column names has always
been authorized by the parser, and it has never been documented.
Since 911e702, it is possible to define opclass parameters as of CREATE
INDEX, which actually broke the old case of ALTER INDEX/TABLE where
relation-level parameters n_distinct and n_distinct_inherited could be
defined for an index (see 76a47c0 and its thread where this point has
been touched, still remained unused). Attempting to do that in v13~
would cause the index to become unusable, as there is a new dedicated
code path to load opclass parameters instead of the relation-level ones
previously available. Note that it is possible to fix things with a
manual catalog update to bring the relation back online.
This commit disables this command for now as the use of column names for
indexes does not make sense anyway, particularly when it comes to index
expressions where names are automatically computed. One way to properly
support this case properly in the future would be to use column numbers
when it comes to indexes, in the same way as ALTER INDEX .. ALTER COLUMN
.. SET STATISTICS.
Partitioned indexes were already blocked, but not indexes. Some tests
are added for both cases.
There was some code in ANALYZE to enforce n_distinct to be used for an
index expression if the parameter was defined, but just remove it for
now until/if there is support for this (note that index-level parameters
never had support in pg_dump either, previously), so this was just dead
code.
Reported-by: Matthijs van der Vleuten
Author: Nathan Bossart, Michael Paquier
Reviewed-by: Vik Fearing, Dilip Kumar
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17220-15d684c6c2171a83@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 13
Failing to do that, any direct inserts/updates of those partitions
would fail to enforce the correct constraint, that is, one that
considers the new partition constraint of their parent table.
Backpatch to 10.
Reported by: Hou Zhijie <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>
Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Reviewed-by: Nitin Jadhav <nitinjadhavpostgres@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/OS3PR01MB5718DA1C4609A25186D1FBF194089%40OS3PR01MB5718.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
During a replication slot creation, an ERROR generated in the same
transaction as the one creating a to-be-exported snapshot would have
left the backend in an inconsistent state, as the associated static
export snapshot state was not being reset on transaction abort, but only
on the follow-up command received by the WAL sender that created this
snapshot on replication slot creation. This would trigger inconsistency
failures if this session tried to export again a snapshot, like during
the creation of a replication slot.
Note that a snapshot export cannot happen in a transaction block, so
there is no need to worry resetting this state for subtransaction
aborts. Also, this inconsistent state would very unlikely show up to
users. For example, one case where this could happen is an
out-of-memory error when building the initial snapshot to-be-exported.
Dilip found this problem while poking at a different patch, that caused
an error in this code path for reasons unrelated to HEAD.
Author: Dilip Kumar
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier, Zhihong Yu
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFiTN-s0zA1Kj0ozGHwkYkHwa5U0zUE94RSc_g81WrpcETB5=w@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 9.6
It was clearly the intent to do so all along, but the original coding
fat-fingered this by checking the wrong array element. We fixed it
in passing in 403a3d91c, but that later got reverted, and we forgot
to keep this bug fix.
Most of the time this'd be relatively harmless, since once we lock
any of the partitioned table's leaf partitions, that would suffice
to prevent major DDL on the partitioned table itself. However, a
childless partitioned table would get dumped with no relevant lock
whatsoever, possibly allowing dump failure or inconsistent output.
Unlike 403a3d91c, there are no versioning concerns, since every server
version that has partitioned tables will allow you to lock one.
Back-patch to v10 where partitioned tables were introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1018205.1634346327@sss.pgh.pa.us
An extension may want to call GetSecurityLabel() on a shared object
before the shared relcaches are fully initialized. For instance, a
ClientAuthentication_hook might want to retrieve the security label on
a role.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/ecb7af0b26e3be1d96d291c8453a86f1f82d9061.camel@j-davis.com
Backpatch-through: 9.6
If a function-in-FROM laterally references the output of some sub-SELECT
earlier in the FROM clause, and we are able to flatten that sub-SELECT
into the outer query, the expression(s) copied into the function RTE
missed being processed by eval_const_expressions. This'd lead to trouble
and probable crashes at execution if such expressions contained
named-argument function call syntax or functions with defaulted arguments.
The bug is masked if the query contains any explicit JOIN syntax, which
may help explain why we'd not noticed.
Per bug #17227 from Bernd Dorn. This is an oversight in commit 7266d0997,
so back-patch to v13 where that came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17227-5a28ed1512189fa4@postgresql.org
Michael Paquier
Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera
Peter Eisentraut
Alexander Korotkov
Heikki Linnakangas
Peter Geoghegan
Magnus Hagander
Thomas Munro
Noah Misch
Amit Kapila
Andres Freund
Daniel Gustafsson
Jeff Davis