In commit afb9249d06, we (probably I) made ExecLockRows assign
null test tuples to all relations of the query while setting up to do an
EvalPlanQual recheck for a newly-updated locked row. This was sheerest
brain fade: we should only set test tuples for relations that are lockable
by the LockRows node, and in particular empty test tuples are only sensible
for inheritance child relations that weren't the source of the current
tuple from their inheritance tree. Setting a null test tuple for an
unrelated table causes it to return NULLs when it should not, as exhibited
in bug #14034 from Bronislav Houdek. To add insult to injury, doing it the
wrong way required two loops where one would suffice; so the corrected code
is even a bit shorter and faster.
Add a regression test case based on his example, and back-patch to 9.5
where the bug was introduced.
Previously, FDWs could only do "early row locking", that is lock a row as
soon as it's fetched, even though local restriction/join conditions might
discard the row later. This patch adds callbacks that allow FDWs to do
late locking in the same way that it's done for regular tables.
To make use of this feature, an FDW must support the "ctid" column as a
unique row identifier. Currently, since ctid has to be of type TID,
the feature is of limited use, though in principle it could be used by
postgres_fdw. We may eventually allow FDWs to specify another data type
for ctid, which would make it possible for more FDWs to use this feature.
This commit does not modify postgres_fdw to use late locking. We've
tested some prototype code for that, but it's not in committable shape,
and besides it's quite unclear whether it actually makes sense to do late
locking against a remote server. The extra round trips required are likely
to outweigh any benefit from improved concurrency.
Etsuro Fujita, reviewed by Ashutosh Bapat, and hacked up a lot by me
The newly added ON CONFLICT clause allows to specify an alternative to
raising a unique or exclusion constraint violation error when inserting.
ON CONFLICT refers to constraints that can either be specified using a
inference clause (by specifying the columns of a unique constraint) or
by naming a unique or exclusion constraint. DO NOTHING avoids the
constraint violation, without touching the pre-existing row. DO UPDATE
SET ... [WHERE ...] updates the pre-existing tuple, and has access to
both the tuple proposed for insertion and the existing tuple; the
optional WHERE clause can be used to prevent an update from being
executed. The UPDATE SET and WHERE clauses have access to the tuple
proposed for insertion using the "magic" EXCLUDED alias, and to the
pre-existing tuple using the table name or its alias.
This feature is often referred to as upsert.
This is implemented using a new infrastructure called "speculative
insertion". It is an optimistic variant of regular insertion that first
does a pre-check for existing tuples and then attempts an insert. If a
violating tuple was inserted concurrently, the speculatively inserted
tuple is deleted and a new attempt is made. If the pre-check finds a
matching tuple the alternative DO NOTHING or DO UPDATE action is taken.
If the insertion succeeds without detecting a conflict, the tuple is
deemed inserted.
To handle the possible ambiguity between the excluded alias and a table
named excluded, and for convenience with long relation names, INSERT
INTO now can alias its target table.
Bumps catversion as stored rules change.
Author: Peter Geoghegan, with significant contributions from Heikki
Linnakangas and Andres Freund. Testing infrastructure by Jeff Janes.
Reviewed-By: Heikki Linnakangas, Andres Freund, Robert Haas, Simon Riggs,
Dean Rasheed, Stephen Frost and many others.
Foreign tables can now be inheritance children, or parents. Much of the
system was already ready for this, but we had to fix a few things of
course, mostly in the area of planner and executor handling of row locks.
As side effects of this, allow foreign tables to have NOT VALID CHECK
constraints (and hence to accept ALTER ... VALIDATE CONSTRAINT), and to
accept ALTER SET STORAGE and ALTER SET WITH/WITHOUT OIDS. Continuing to
disallow these things would've required bizarre and inconsistent special
cases in inheritance behavior. Since foreign tables don't enforce CHECK
constraints anyway, a NOT VALID one is a complete no-op, but that doesn't
mean we shouldn't allow it. And it's possible that some FDWs might have
use for SET STORAGE or SET WITH OIDS, though doubtless they will be no-ops
for most.
An additional change in support of this is that when a ModifyTable node
has multiple target tables, they will all now be explicitly identified
in EXPLAIN output, for example:
Update on pt1 (cost=0.00..321.05 rows=3541 width=46)
Update on pt1
Foreign Update on ft1
Foreign Update on ft2
Update on child3
-> Seq Scan on pt1 (cost=0.00..0.00 rows=1 width=46)
-> Foreign Scan on ft1 (cost=100.00..148.03 rows=1170 width=46)
-> Foreign Scan on ft2 (cost=100.00..148.03 rows=1170 width=46)
-> Seq Scan on child3 (cost=0.00..25.00 rows=1200 width=46)
This was done mainly to provide an unambiguous place to attach "Remote SQL"
fields, but it is useful for inherited updates even when no foreign tables
are involved.
Shigeru Hanada and Etsuro Fujita, reviewed by Ashutosh Bapat and Kyotaro
Horiguchi, some additional hacking by me
In READ COMMITTED mode, if a SELECT FOR UPDATE discovers it has to redo
WHERE-clause checking on rows that have been updated since the SELECT's
snapshot, it invokes EvalPlanQual processing to do that. If this first
occurs within a non-first child table of an inheritance tree, the previous
coding could accidentally re-return a matching row from an earlier,
already-scanned child table. (And, to add insult to injury, I think this
could make it miss returning a row that should have been returned, if the
updated row that this happens on should still have passed the WHERE qual.)
Per report from Kyotaro Horiguchi; the added isolation test is based on his
test case.
This has been broken for quite awhile, so back-patch to all supported
branches.
This clause changes the behavior of SELECT locking clauses in the
presence of locked rows: instead of causing a process to block waiting
for the locks held by other processes (or raise an error, with NOWAIT),
SKIP LOCKED makes the new reader skip over such rows. While this is not
appropriate behavior for general purposes, there are some cases in which
it is useful, such as queue-like tables.
Catalog version bumped because this patch changes the representation of
stored rules.
Reviewed by Craig Ringer (based on a previous attempt at an
implementation by Simon Riggs, who also provided input on the syntax
used in the current patch), David Rowley, and Álvaro Herrera.
Author: Thomas Munro
If SELECT FOR UPDATE NOWAIT tries to lock a tuple that is concurrently
being updated, it might fail to honor its NOWAIT specification and block
instead of raising an error.
Fix by adding a no-wait flag to EvalPlanQualFetch which it can pass down
to heap_lock_tuple; also use it in EvalPlanQualFetch itself to avoid
blocking while waiting for a concurrent transaction.
Authors: Craig Ringer and Thomas Munro, tweaked by Álvaro
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/51FB6703.9090801@2ndquadrant.com
Per Thomas Munro in the course of his SKIP LOCKED feature submission,
who also provided one of the isolation test specs.
Backpatch to 9.4, because that's as far back as it applies without
conflicts (although the bug goes all the way back). To that branch also
backpatch Thomas Munro's new NOWAIT test cases, committed in master by
Heikki as commit 9ee16b49f0 .
This patch introduces two additional lock modes for tuples: "SELECT FOR
KEY SHARE" and "SELECT FOR NO KEY UPDATE". These don't block each
other, in contrast with already existing "SELECT FOR SHARE" and "SELECT
FOR UPDATE". UPDATE commands that do not modify the values stored in
the columns that are part of the key of the tuple now grab a SELECT FOR
NO KEY UPDATE lock on the tuple, allowing them to proceed concurrently
with tuple locks of the FOR KEY SHARE variety.
Foreign key triggers now use FOR KEY SHARE instead of FOR SHARE; this
means the concurrency improvement applies to them, which is the whole
point of this patch.
The added tuple lock semantics require some rejiggering of the multixact
module, so that the locking level that each transaction is holding can
be stored alongside its Xid. Also, multixacts now need to persist
across server restarts and crashes, because they can now represent not
only tuple locks, but also tuple updates. This means we need more
careful tracking of lifetime of pg_multixact SLRU files; since they now
persist longer, we require more infrastructure to figure out when they
can be removed. pg_upgrade also needs to be careful to copy
pg_multixact files over from the old server to the new, or at least part
of multixact.c state, depending on the versions of the old and new
servers.
Tuple time qualification rules (HeapTupleSatisfies routines) need to be
careful not to consider tuples with the "is multi" infomask bit set as
being only locked; they might need to look up MultiXact values (i.e.
possibly do pg_multixact I/O) to find out the Xid that updated a tuple,
whereas they previously were assured to only use information readily
available from the tuple header. This is considered acceptable, because
the extra I/O would involve cases that would previously cause some
commands to block waiting for concurrent transactions to finish.
Another important change is the fact that locking tuples that have
previously been updated causes the future versions to be marked as
locked, too; this is essential for correctness of foreign key checks.
This causes additional WAL-logging, also (there was previously a single
WAL record for a locked tuple; now there are as many as updated copies
of the tuple there exist.)
With all this in place, contention related to tuples being checked by
foreign key rules should be much reduced.
As a bonus, the old behavior that a subtransaction grabbing a stronger
tuple lock than the parent (sub)transaction held on a given tuple and
later aborting caused the weaker lock to be lost, has been fixed.
Many new spec files were added for isolation tester framework, to ensure
overall behavior is sane. There's probably room for several more tests.
There were several reviewers of this patch; in particular, Noah Misch
and Andres Freund spent considerable time in it. Original idea for the
patch came from Simon Riggs, after a problem report by Joel Jacobson.
Most code is from me, with contributions from Marti Raudsepp, Alexander
Shulgin, Noah Misch and Andres Freund.
This patch was discussed in several pgsql-hackers threads; the most
important start at the following message-ids:
AANLkTimo9XVcEzfiBR-ut3KVNDkjm2Vxh+t8kAmWjPuv@mail.gmail.com1290721684-sup-3951@alvh.no-ip.org1294953201-sup-2099@alvh.no-ip.org1320343602-sup-2290@alvh.no-ip.org1339690386-sup-8927@alvh.no-ip.org4FE5FF020200002500048A3D@gw.wicourts.gov4FEAB90A0200002500048B7D@gw.wicourts.gov
This prevents surprising behavior when a FOR EACH ROW trigger
BEFORE UPDATE or BEFORE DELETE directly or indirectly updates or
deletes the the old row. Prior to this patch the requested action
on the row could be silently ignored while all triggered actions
based on the occurence of the requested action could be committed.
One example of how this could happen is if the BEFORE DELETE
trigger for a "parent" row deleted "children" which had trigger
functions to update summary or status data on the parent.
This also prevents similar surprising problems if the query has a
volatile function which updates a target row while it is already
being updated.
There are related issues present in FOR UPDATE cursors and READ
COMMITTED queries which are not handled by this patch. These
issues need further evalution to determine what change, if any, is
needed.
Where the new error messages are generated, in most cases the best
fix will be to move code from the BEFORE trigger to an AFTER
trigger. Where this is not feasible, the trigger can avoid the
error by re-issuing the triggering statement and returning NULL.
Documentation changes will be submitted in a separate patch.
Kevin Grittner and Tom Lane with input from Florian Pflug and
Robert Haas, based on problems encountered during conversion of
Wisconsin Circuit Court trigger logic to plpgsql triggers.
This reduces unnecessary exposure of other headers through htup.h, which
is very widely included by many files.
I have chosen to move the function prototypes to the new file as well,
because that means htup.h no longer needs to include tupdesc.h. In
itself this doesn't have much effect in indirect inclusion of tupdesc.h
throughout the tree, because it's also required by execnodes.h; but it's
something to explore in the future, and it seemed best to do the htup.h
change now while I'm busy with it.
In an inherited UPDATE/DELETE, each target table has its own subplan,
because it might have a column set different from other targets. This
means that the resjunk columns we add to support EvalPlanQual might be
at different physical column numbers in each subplan. The EvalPlanQual
rewrite I did for 9.0 failed to account for this, resulting in possible
misbehavior or even crashes during concurrent updates to the same row,
as seen in a recent report from Gordon Shannon. Revise the data structure
so that we track resjunk column numbers separately for each subplan.
I also chose to move responsibility for identifying the physical column
numbers back to executor startup, instead of assuming that numbers derived
during preprocess_targetlist would stay valid throughout subsequent
massaging of the plan. That's a bit slower, so we might want to consider
undoing it someday; but it would complicate the patch considerably and
didn't seem justifiable in a bug fix that has to be back-patched to 9.0.
transaction snapshots, i.e. a snapshot registered at the beginning of
a transaction. Change variable naming and comments to reflect this reality
in preparation for a future, truly serializable mode, e.g.
Serializable Snapshot Isolation (SSI).
For the moment transaction snapshots are still used to implement
SERIALIZABLE, but hopefully not for too much longer. Patch by Kevin
Grittner and Dan Ports with review and some minor wording changes by me.
list in ExecLockRows() forgot to allow for the possibility that some of the
rowmarks are for child tables that aren't relevant to the current row.
Per report from Kenichiro Tanaka.
relation using the general PARAM_EXEC executor parameter mechanism, rather
than the ad-hoc kluge of passing the outer tuple down through ExecReScan.
The previous method was hard to understand and could never be extended to
handle parameters coming from multiple join levels. This patch doesn't
change the set of possible plans nor have any significant performance effect,
but it's necessary infrastructure for future generalization of the concept
of an inner indexscan plan.
ExecReScan's second parameter is now unused, so it's removed.
a lot of strange behaviors that occurred in join cases. We now identify the
"current" row for every joined relation in UPDATE, DELETE, and SELECT FOR
UPDATE/SHARE queries. If an EvalPlanQual recheck is necessary, we jam the
appropriate row into each scan node in the rechecking plan, forcing it to emit
only that one row. The former behavior could rescan the whole of each joined
relation for each recheck, which was terrible for performance, and what's much
worse could result in duplicated output tuples.
Also, the original implementation of EvalPlanQual could not re-use the recheck
execution tree --- it had to go through a full executor init and shutdown for
every row to be tested. To avoid this overhead, I've associated a special
runtime Param with each LockRows or ModifyTable plan node, and arranged to
make every scan node below such a node depend on that Param. Thus, by
signaling a change in that Param, the EPQ machinery can just rescan the
already-built test plan.
This patch also adds a prohibition on set-returning functions in the
targetlist of SELECT FOR UPDATE/SHARE. This is needed to avoid the
duplicate-output-tuple problem. It seems fairly reasonable since the
other restrictions on SELECT FOR UPDATE are meant to ensure that there
is a unique correspondence between source tuples and result tuples,
which an output SRF destroys as much as anything else does.
execMain.c and into a new plan node type LockRows. Like the recent change
to put table updating into a ModifyTable plan node, this increases planning
flexibility by allowing the operations to occur below the top level of the
plan tree. It's necessary in any case to restore the previous behavior of
having FOR UPDATE locking occur before ModifyTable does.
This partially refactors EvalPlanQual to allow multiple rows-under-test
to be inserted into the EPQ machinery before starting an EPQ test query.
That isn't sufficient to fix EPQ's general bogosity in the face of plans
that return multiple rows per test row, though. Since this patch is
mostly about getting some plan node infrastructure in place and not about
fixing ten-year-old bugs, I will leave EPQ improvements for another day.
Another behavioral change that we could now think about is doing FOR UPDATE
before LIMIT, but that too seems like it should be treated as a followon
patch.
Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian
Andres Freund
Alvaro Herrera
Kevin Grittner
Magnus Hagander
Joe Conway