Many older tests where written in a style like
SELECT '' AS two, i.* FROM INT2_TBL
where the first column indicated the number of expected result rows.
This has gotten increasingly out of date, as the test data fixtures
have expanded, so a lot of these were wrong and misleading. Moreover,
this style isn't really necessary, since the psql output already shows
the number of result rows.
To clean this up, remove all those extra columns.
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/1a25312b-2686-380d-3c67-7a69094a999f%40enterprisedb.com
An array-type coercion appearing within a CASE that has a constant
(after const-folding) test expression was mangled by the planner, causing
all the elements of the resulting array to be equal to the coerced value
of the CASE's test expression. This is my oversight in commit c12d570fa:
that changed ArrayCoerceExpr to use a subexpression involving a
CaseTestExpr, and I didn't notice that eval_const_expressions needed an
adjustment to keep from folding such a CaseTestExpr to a constant when
it's inside a suitable CASE.
This is another in what's getting to be a depressingly long line of bugs
associated with misidentification of the referent of a CaseTestExpr.
We're overdue to redesign that mechanism; but any such fix is unlikely
to be back-patchable into v11. As a stopgap, fix eval_const_expressions
to do what it must here. Also add a bunch of comments pointing out the
restrictions and assumptions that are needed to make this work at all.
Also fix a related oversight: contain_context_dependent_node() was not
aware of the relationship of ArrayCoerceExpr to CaseTestExpr. That was
somewhat fail-soft, in that the outcome of a wrong answer would be to
prevent optimizations that could have been made, but let's fix it while
we're at it.
Per bug #15471 from Matt Williams. Back-patch to v11 where the faulty
logic came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15471-1117f49271989bad@postgresql.org
This replaces the old, recursive tree-walk based evaluation, with
non-recursive, opcode dispatch based, expression evaluation.
Projection is now implemented as part of expression evaluation.
This both leads to significant performance improvements, and makes
future just-in-time compilation of expressions easier.
The speed gains primarily come from:
- non-recursive implementation reduces stack usage / overhead
- simple sub-expressions are implemented with a single jump, without
function calls
- sharing some state between different sub-expressions
- reduced amount of indirect/hard to predict memory accesses by laying
out operation metadata sequentially; including the avoidance of
nearly all of the previously used linked lists
- more code has been moved to expression initialization, avoiding
constant re-checks at evaluation time
Future just-in-time compilation (JIT) has become easier, as
demonstrated by released patches intended to be merged in a later
release, for primarily two reasons: Firstly, due to a stricter split
between expression initialization and evaluation, less code has to be
handled by the JIT. Secondly, due to the non-recursive nature of the
generated "instructions", less performance-critical code-paths can
easily be shared between interpreted and compiled evaluation.
The new framework allows for significant future optimizations. E.g.:
- basic infrastructure for to later reduce the per executor-startup
overhead of expression evaluation, by caching state in prepared
statements. That'd be helpful in OLTPish scenarios where
initialization overhead is measurable.
- optimizing the generated "code". A number of proposals for potential
work has already been made.
- optimizing the interpreter. Similarly a number of proposals have
been made here too.
The move of logic into the expression initialization step leads to some
backward-incompatible changes:
- Function permission checks are now done during expression
initialization, whereas previously they were done during
execution. In edge cases this can lead to errors being raised that
previously wouldn't have been, e.g. a NULL array being coerced to a
different array type previously didn't perform checks.
- The set of domain constraints to be checked, is now evaluated once
during expression initialization, previously it was re-built
every time a domain check was evaluated. For normal queries this
doesn't change much, but e.g. for plpgsql functions, which caches
ExprStates, the old set could stick around longer. The behavior
around might still change.
Author: Andres Freund, with significant changes by Tom Lane,
changes by Heikki Linnakangas
Reviewed-By: Tom Lane, Heikki Linnakangas
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20161206034955.bh33paeralxbtluv@alap3.anarazel.de
Upcoming patches are revamping expression evaluation significantly. It
therefore seems prudent to try to ensure that the coverage of the
existing evaluation code is high.
This commit adds coverage for the cases that can reasonably be
tested. There's still a bunch of unreachable error messages and such,
but otherwise this achieves nearly full regression test coverage (with
the exception of the unused GetAttributeByNum/GetAttributeByName).
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170310194021.ek4bs4bl2khxkmll@alap3.anarazel.de
When the input value to a CoerceToDomain expression node is a read-write
expanded datum, we should pass a read-only pointer to any domain CHECK
expressions and then return the original read-write pointer as the
expression result. Previously we were blindly passing the same pointer to
all the consumers of the value, making it possible for a function in CHECK
to modify or even delete the expanded value. (Since a plpgsql function
will absorb a passed-in read-write expanded array as a local variable
value, it will in fact delete the value on exit.)
A similar hazard of passing the same read-write pointer to multiple
consumers exists in domain_check() and in ExecEvalCase, so fix those too.
The fix requires adding MakeExpandedObjectReadOnly calls at the appropriate
places, which is simple enough except that we need to get the data type's
typlen from somewhere. For the domain cases, solve this by redefining
DomainConstraintRef.tcache as okay for callers to access; there wasn't any
reason for the original convention against that, other than not wanting the
API of typcache.c to be any wider than it had to be. For CASE, there's
no good solution except to add a syscache lookup during executor start.
Per bug #14472 from Marcos Castedo. Back-patch to 9.5 where expanded
values were introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15225.1482431619@sss.pgh.pa.us
Commit f0c7b789a added a test case in case.sql that creates and then drops
both an '=' operator and the type it's for. Given the right timing, that
can cause a "cache lookup failed for type" failure in concurrent sessions,
which see the '=' operator as a potential match for '=' in a query, but
then the type is gone by the time they inquire into its properties.
It might be nice to make that behavior more robust someday, but as a
back-patchable solution, adjust the new test case so that the operator
is never visible to other sessions. Like the previous commit, back-patch
to all supported branches.
Discussion: <5983.1471371667@sss.pgh.pa.us>
ExecEvalCase() tried to save a cycle or two by passing
&econtext->caseValue_isNull as the isNull argument to its sub-evaluation of
the CASE value expression. If that subexpression itself contained a CASE,
then *isNull was an alias for econtext->caseValue_isNull within the
recursive call of ExecEvalCase(), leading to confusion about whether the
inner call's caseValue was null or not. In the worst case this could lead
to a core dump due to dereferencing a null pointer. Fix by not assigning
to the global variable until control comes back from the subexpression.
Also, avoid using the passed-in isNull pointer transiently for evaluation
of WHEN expressions. (Either one of these changes would have been
sufficient to fix the known misbehavior, but it's clear now that each of
these choices was in itself dangerous coding practice and best avoided.
There do not seem to be any similar hazards elsewhere in execQual.c.)
Also, it was possible for inlining of a SQL function that implements the
equality operator used for a CASE comparison to result in one CASE
expression's CaseTestExpr node being inserted inside another CASE
expression. This would certainly result in wrong answers since the
improperly nested CaseTestExpr would be caused to return the inner CASE's
comparison value not the outer's. If the CASE values were of different
data types, a crash might result; moreover such situations could be abused
to allow disclosure of portions of server memory. To fix, teach
inline_function to check for "bare" CaseTestExpr nodes in the arguments of
a function to be inlined, and avoid inlining if there are any.
Heikki Linnakangas, Michael Paquier, Tom Lane
Report: https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/pull/327
Report: <4DDCEEB8.50602@enterprisedb.com>
Security: CVE-2016-5423
In most cases, these were just references to the SQL standard in
general. In a few cases, a contrast was made between SQL92 and later
standards -- those have been kept unchanged.
form of CASE (eg, CASE 0 WHEN 1 THEN ...) can be constant-folded as it
was in 7.4. Also, avoid constant-folding result expressions that are
certainly unreachable --- the former coding was a bit cavalier about this
and could generate unexpected results for all-constant CASE expressions.
Add regression test cases. Per report from Vlad Marchenko.
a relation's number of blocks, rather than the possibly-obsolete value
in pg_class.relpages. Scale the value in pg_class.reltuples correspondingly
to arrive at a hopefully more accurate number of rows. When pg_class
contains 0/0, estimate a tuple width from the column datatypes and divide
that into current file size to estimate number of rows. This improved
methodology allows us to jettison the ancient hacks that put bogus default
values into pg_class when a table is first created. Also, per a suggestion
from Simon, make VACUUM (but not VACUUM FULL or ANALYZE) adjust the value
it puts into pg_class.reltuples to try to represent the mean tuple density
instead of the minimal density that actually prevails just after VACUUM.
These changes alter the plans selected for certain regression tests, so
update the expected files accordingly. (I removed join_1.out because
it's not clear if it still applies; we can add back any variant versions
as they are shown to be needed.)
Peter Eisentraut
Tom Lane
Andres Freund
Peter Eisentraut
Neil Conway
Thomas G. Lockhart