rewriteTargetListUD's processing is dependent on the relkind of the query's
target table. That was fine at the time it was made to act that way, even
for queries on inheritance trees, because all tables in an inheritance tree
would necessarily be plain tables. However, the 9.5 feature addition
allowing some members of an inheritance tree to be foreign tables broke the
assumption that rewriteTargetListUD's output tlist could be applied to all
child tables with nothing more than column-number mapping. This led to
visible failures if foreign child tables had row-level triggers, and would
also break in cases where child tables belonged to FDWs that used methods
other than CTID for row identification.
To fix, delay running rewriteTargetListUD until after the planner has
expanded inheritance, so that it is applied separately to the (already
mapped) tlist for each child table. We can conveniently call it from
preprocess_targetlist. Refactor associated code slightly to avoid the
need to heap_open the target relation multiple times during
preprocess_targetlist. (The APIs remain a bit ugly, particularly around
the point of which steps scribble on parse->targetList and which don't.
But avoiding such scribbling would require a change in FDW callback APIs,
which is more pain than it's worth.)
Also fix ExecModifyTable to ensure that "tupleid" is reset to NULL when
we transition from rows providing a CTID to rows that don't. (That's
really an independent bug, but it manifests in much the same cases.)
Add a regression test checking one manifestation of this problem, which
was that row-level triggers on a foreign child table did not work right.
Back-patch to 9.5 where the problem was introduced.
Etsuro Fujita, reviewed by Ildus Kurbangaliev and Ashutosh Bapat
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170514150525.0346ba72@postgrespro.ru
Since some preparation work had already been done, the only source
changes left were changing empty-element tags like <xref linkend="foo">
to <xref linkend="foo"/>, and changing the DOCTYPE.
The source files are still named *.sgml, but they are actually XML files
now. Renaming could be considered later.
In the build system, the intermediate step to convert from SGML to XML
is removed. Everything is build straight from the source files again.
The OpenSP (or the old SP) package is no longer needed.
The documentation toolchain instructions are updated and are much
simpler now.
Peter Eisentraut, Alexander Lakhin, Jürgen Purtz
IDs in SGML are case insensitive, and we have accumulated a mix of upper
and lower case IDs, including different variants of the same ID. In
XML, these will be case sensitive, so we need to fix up those
differences. Going to all lower case seems most straightforward, and
the current build process already makes all anchors and lower case
anyway during the SGML->XML conversion, so this doesn't create any
difference in the output right now. A future XML-only build process
would, however, maintain any mixed case ID spellings in the output, so
that is another reason to clean this up beforehand.
Author: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
For DocBook XML compatibility, don't use SGML empty tags (</>) anymore,
replace by the full tag name. Add a warning option to catch future
occurrences.
Alexander Lakhin, Jürgen Purtz
For XML compatibility, replace marked sections <![IGNORE[ ]]> with
comments <!-- -->. In some cases it seemed better to remove the ignored
text altogether, and in one case the text should not have been ignored.
This is not required in SGML, but will be in XML, so this is a step to
prepare for the conversion to XML. (It is still not required to escape
>, but we did it here in some cases for symmetry.)
Add a command-line option to osx/onsgmls calls to warn about unescaped
occurrences in the future.
Author: Alexander Law <exclusion@gmail.com>
Author: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
The reference "That is the topic of the next section." has been
incorrect since the materialized views documentation got inserted
between the section "rules-views" and "rules-update".
Author: Zertrin <postgres_wiki@zertrin.org>
The original security barrier view implementation, on which RLS is
built, prevented all non-leakproof functions from being pushed down to
below the view, even when the function was not receiving any data from
the view. This optimization improves on that situation by, instead of
checking strictly for non-leakproof functions, it checks for Vars being
passed to non-leakproof functions and allows functions which do not
accept arguments or whose arguments are not from the current query level
(eg: constants can be particularly useful) to be pushed down.
As discussed, this does mean that a function which is pushed down might
gain some idea that there are rows meeting a certain criteria based on
the number of times the function is called, but this isn't a
particularly new issue and the documentation in rules.sgml already
addressed similar covert-channel risks. That documentation is updated
to reflect that non-leakproof functions may be pushed down now, if
they meet the above-described criteria.
Author: Dean Rasheed, with a bit of rework to make things clearer,
along with comment and documentation updates from me.
As pointed out by Robert, we should really have named pg_rowsecurity
pg_policy, as the objects stored in that catalog are policies. This
patch fixes that and updates the column names to start with 'pol' to
match the new catalog name.
The security consideration for COPY with row level security, also
pointed out by Robert, has also been addressed by remembering and
re-checking the OID of the relation initially referenced during COPY
processing, to make sure it hasn't changed under us by the time we
finish planning out the query which has been built.
Robert and Alvaro also commented on missing OCLASS and OBJECT entries
for POLICY (formerly ROWSECURITY or POLICY, depending) in various
places. This patch fixes that too, which also happens to add the
ability to COMMENT on policies.
In passing, attempt to improve the consistency of messages, comments,
and documentation as well. This removes various incarnations of
'row-security', 'row-level security', 'Row-security', etc, in favor
of 'policy', 'row level security' or 'row_security' as appropriate.
Happy Thanksgiving!
This SQL-standard feature allows a sub-SELECT yielding multiple columns
(but only one row) to be used to compute the new values of several columns
to be updated. While the same results can be had with an independent
sub-SELECT per column, such a workaround can require a great deal of
duplicated computation.
The standard actually says that the source for a multi-column assignment
could be any row-valued expression. The implementation used here is
tightly tied to our existing sub-SELECT support and can't handle other
cases; the Bison grammar would have some issues with them too. However,
I don't feel too bad about this since other cases can be converted into
sub-SELECTs. For instance, "SET (a,b,c) = row_valued_function(x)" could
be written "SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT * FROM row_valued_function(x))".
The main problem is that DocBook SGML allows indexterm elements just
about everywhere, but DocBook XML is stricter. For example, this common
pattern
<varlistentry>
<indexterm>...</indexterm>
<term>...</term>
...
</varlistentry>
needs to be changed to something like
<varlistentry>
<term>...<indexterm>...</indexterm></term>
...
</varlistentry>
See also bb4eefe7bf.
There is currently nothing in the build system that enforces that things
stay valid, because that requires additional tools and will receive
separate consideration.
Now that EXPLAIN also outputs a "planning time" measurement, the use of
"total" here seems rather confusing: it sounds like it might include the
planning time which of course it doesn't. Majority opinion was that
"execution time" is a better label, so we'll call it that.
This should be noted as a backwards incompatibility for tools that examine
EXPLAIN ANALYZE output.
In passing, I failed to resist the temptation to do a little editing on the
materialized-view example affected by this change.
A materialized view has a rule just like a view and a heap and
other physical properties like a table. The rule is only used to
populate the table, references in queries refer to the
materialized data.
This is a minimal implementation, but should still be useful in
many cases. Currently data is only populated "on demand" by the
CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW and REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW statements.
It is expected that future releases will add incremental updates
with various timings, and that a more refined concept of defining
what is "fresh" data will be developed. At some point it may even
be possible to have queries use a materialized in place of
references to underlying tables, but that requires the other
above-mentioned features to be working first.
Much of the documentation work by Robert Haas.
Review by Noah Misch, Thom Brown, Robert Haas, Marko Tiikkaja
Security review by KaiGai Kohei, with a decision on how best to
implement sepgsql still pending.
This patch makes "simple" views automatically updatable, without the need
to create either INSTEAD OF triggers or INSTEAD rules. "Simple" views
are those classified as updatable according to SQL-92 rules. The rewriter
transforms INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE commands on such views directly into an
equivalent command on the underlying table, which will generally have
noticeably better performance than is possible with either triggers or
user-written rules. A view that has INSTEAD OF triggers or INSTEAD rules
continues to operate the same as before.
For the moment, security_barrier views are not considered simple.
Also, we do not support WITH CHECK OPTION. These features may be
added in future.
Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Amit Kapila
We don't normally allow quals to be pushed down into a view created
with the security_barrier option, but functions without side effects
are an exception: they're OK. This allows much better performance in
common cases, such as when using an equality operator (that might
even be indexable).
There is an outstanding issue here with the CREATE FUNCTION / ALTER
FUNCTION syntax: there's no way to use ALTER FUNCTION to unset the
leakproof flag. But I'm committing this as-is so that it doesn't
have to be rebased again; we can fix up the grammar in a future
commit.
KaiGai Kohei, with some wordsmithing by me.
When a view is marked as a security barrier, it will not be pulled up
into the containing query, and no quals will be pushed down into it,
so that no function or operator chosen by the user can be applied to
rows not exposed by the view. Views not configured with this
option cannot provide robust row-level security, but will perform far
better.
Patch by KaiGai Kohei; original problem report by Heikki Linnakangas
(in October 2009!). Review (in earlier versions) by Noah Misch and
others. Design advice by Tom Lane and myself. Further review and
cleanup by me.
This patch adds the SQL-standard concept of an INSTEAD OF trigger, which
is fired instead of performing a physical insert/update/delete. The
trigger function is passed the entire old and/or new rows of the view,
and must figure out what to do to the underlying tables to implement
the update. So this feature can be used to implement updatable views
using trigger programming style rather than rule hacking.
In passing, this patch corrects the names of some columns in the
information_schema.triggers view. It seems the SQL committee renamed
them somewhere between SQL:99 and SQL:2003.
Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Bernd Helmle; some additional hacking by me.
it works just as well to have them be ordinary identifiers, and this gets rid
of a number of ugly special cases. Plus we aren't interfering with non-rule
usage of these names.
catversion bump because the names change internally in stored rules.
Standard English uses "may", "can", and "might" in different ways:
may - permission, "You may borrow my rake."
can - ability, "I can lift that log."
might - possibility, "It might rain today."
Unfortunately, in conversational English, their use is often mixed, as
in, "You may use this variable to do X", when in fact, "can" is a better
choice. Similarly, "It may crash" is better stated, "It might crash".
Standard English uses "may", "can", and "might" in different ways:
may - permission, "You may borrow my rake."
can - ability, "I can lift that log."
might - possibility, "It might rain today."
Unfortunately, in conversational English, their use is often mixed, as
in, "You may use this variable to do X", when in fact, "can" is a better
choice. Similarly, "It may crash" is better stated, "It might crash".
Also update two error messages mentioned in the documenation to match.
RETURNING play nice with views/rules. To wit, have the rule rewriter
rewrite any RETURNING clause found in a rule to produce what the rule's
triggering query asked for in its RETURNING clause, in particular drop
the RETURNING clause if no RETURNING in the triggering query. This
leaves the responsibility for knowing how to produce the view's output
columns on the rule author, without requiring any fundamental changes
in rule semantics such as adding new rule event types would do. The
initial implementation constrains things to ensure that there is
exactly one, unconditionally invoked RETURNING clause among the rules
for an event --- later we might be able to relax that, but for a post
feature freeze fix it seems better to minimize how much invention we do.
Per gripe from Jaime Casanova.
compatibility for release 7.2 and earlier. I have not altered any
mentions of release 7.3 or later. The release notes were not modified,
so the changes are still documented, just not in the main docs.
Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut
Bruce Momjian
Stephen Frost
Kevin Grittner
Robert Haas
Magnus Hagander
Alvaro Herrera
Neil Conway