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.
The locution "EXISTS(SELECT ... LIMIT 1)" seems to be rather common among
people who don't realize that the database already performs optimizations
equivalent to putting LIMIT 1 in the sub-select. Unfortunately, this was
actually making things worse, because it prevented us from optimizing such
EXISTS clauses into semi or anti joins. Teach simplify_EXISTS_query() to
suppress constant-positive LIMIT clauses. That fixes the semi/anti-join
case, and may help marginally even for cases that have to be left as
sub-SELECTs.
Marti Raudsepp, reviewed by David Rowley
ExecEvalWholeRowVar incorrectly supposed that it could "bless" the source
TupleTableSlot just once per query. But if the input is coming from an
Append (or, perhaps, other cases?) more than one slot might be returned
over the query run. This led to "record type has not been registered"
errors when a composite datum was extracted from a non-blessed slot.
This bug has been there a long time; I guess it escaped notice because when
dealing with subqueries the planner tends to expand whole-row Vars into
RowExprs, which don't have the same problem. It is possible to trigger
the problem in all active branches, though, as illustrated by the added
regression test.
While the x output of "select x from t group by x" can be presumed unique,
this does not hold for "select x, generate_series(1,10) from t group by x",
because we may expand the set-returning function after the grouping step.
(Perhaps that should be re-thought; but considering all the other oddities
involved with SRFs in targetlists, it seems unlikely we'll change it.)
Put a check in query_is_distinct_for() so it's not fooled by such cases.
Back-patch to all supported branches.
David Rowley
A WHERE clause applied to the output of a subquery with DISTINCT should
theoretically be applied only once per distinct row; but if we push it
into the subquery then it will be evaluated at each row before duplicate
elimination occurs. If the qual is volatile this can give rise to
observably wrong results, so don't do that.
While at it, refactor a little bit to allow subquery_is_pushdown_safe
to report more than one kind of restrictive condition without indefinitely
expanding its argument list.
Although this is a bug fix, it seems unwise to back-patch it into released
branches, since it might de-optimize plans for queries that aren't giving
any trouble in practice. So apply to 9.4 but not further back.
An expression such as WHERE (... x IN (SELECT ...) ...) IN (SELECT ...)
could produce an invalid plan that results in a crash at execution time,
if the planner attempts to flatten the outer IN into a semi-join.
This happens because convert_testexpr() was not expecting any nested
SubLinks and would wrongly replace any PARAM_SUBLINK Params belonging
to the inner SubLink. (I think the comment denying that this case could
happen was wrong when written; it's certainly been wrong for quite a long
time, since very early versions of the semijoin flattening logic.)
Per report from Teodor Sigaev. Back-patch to all supported branches.
This change prevents us from doing inappropriate subquery flattening in
cases such as dangerous functions hidden inside a sub-SELECT in the
targetlist of another sub-SELECT. That could result in unexpected behavior
due to multiple evaluations of a volatile function, as in a recent
complaint from Etienne Dube. It's been questionable from the very
beginning whether these functions should look into subqueries (as noted in
their comments), and this case seems to provide proof that they should.
Because the new code only descends into SubLinks, not SubPlans or
InitPlans, the change only affects the planner's behavior during
prepjointree processing and not later on --- for example, you can still get
it to use a volatile function in an indexqual if you wrap the function in
(SELECT ...). That's a historical behavior, for sure, but it's reasonable
given that the executor's evaluation rules for subplans don't depend on
whether there are volatile functions inside them. In any case, we need to
constrain the behavioral change as narrowly as we can to make this
reasonable to back-patch.
Such cases should work, but the grammar failed to accept them because of
our ancient precedence hacks to convince bison that extra parentheses
around a sub-SELECT in an expression are unambiguous. (Formally, they
*are* ambiguous, but we don't especially care whether they're treated as
part of the sub-SELECT or part of the expression. Bison cares, though.)
Fix by adding a redundant-looking production for this case.
This is a fine example of why fixing shift/reduce conflicts via
precedence declarations is more dangerous than it looks: you can easily
cause the parser to reject cases that should work.
This has been wrong since commit 3db4056e22
or maybe before, and apparently some people have been working around it
by inserting no-op casts. That method introduces a dump/reload hazard,
as illustrated in bug #7838 from Jan Mate. Hence, back-patch to all
active branches.
When hashing a subplan like "WHERE (a, b) NOT IN (SELECT x, y FROM ...)",
findPartialMatch() attempted to match rows using the hashtable's internal
equality operators, which of course are for x and y's datatypes. What we
need to use are the potentially cross-type operators for a=x, b=y, etc.
Failure to do that leads to wrong answers or even crashes. The scope for
problems is limited to cases where we have different types with compatible
hash functions (else we'd not be using a hashed subplan), but for example
int4 vs int8 can cause the problem.
Per bug #7597 from Bo Jensen. This has been wrong since the hashed-subplan
code was written, so patch all the way back.
When a whole-row Var is reading the result of a subquery, we need it to
ignore any "resjunk" columns that the subquery might have evaluated for
GROUP BY or ORDER BY purposes. We've hacked this area before, in commit
68e40998d0, but that fix only covered
whole-row Vars of named composite types, not those of RECORD type; and it
was mighty klugy anyway, since it just assumed without checking that any
extra columns in the result must be resjunk. A proper fix requires getting
hold of the subquery's targetlist so we can actually see which columns are
resjunk (whereupon we can use a JunkFilter to get rid of them). So bite
the bullet and add some infrastructure to make that possible.
Per report from Andrew Dunstan and additional testing by Merlin Moncure.
Back-patch to all supported branches. In 8.3, also back-patch commit
292176a118, which for some reason I had
not done at the time, but it's a prerequisite for this change.
When recursing after an optimization in pull_up_sublinks_qual_recurse, the
available_rels value passed down must include only the relations that are
in the righthand side of the new SEMI or ANTI join; it's incorrect to pull
up a sub-select that refers to other relations, as seen in the added test
case. Per report from BangarRaju Vadapalli.
While at it, rethink the idea of recursing below a NOT EXISTS. That is
essentially the same situation as pulling up ANY/EXISTS sub-selects that
are in the ON clause of an outer join, and it has the same disadvantage:
we'd force the two joins to be evaluated according to the syntactic nesting
order, because the lower join will most likely not be able to commute with
the ANTI join. That could result in having to form a rather large join
product, whereas the handling of a correlated subselect is not quite that
dumb. So until we can handle those cases better, #ifdef NOT_USED that
case. (I think it's okay to pull up in the EXISTS/ANY cases, because SEMI
joins aren't so inflexible about ordering.)
Back-patch to 8.4, same as for previous patch in this area. Fortunately
that patch hadn't made it into any shipped releases yet.
a pass-by-reference datatype with a nontrivial projection step.
We were using the same memory context for the projection operation as for
the temporary context used by the hashtable routines in execGrouping.c.
However, the hashtable routines feel free to reset their temp context at
any time, which'd lead to destroying input data that was still needed.
Report and diagnosis by Tao Ma.
Back-patch to 8.1, where the problem was introduced by the changes that
allowed us to work with "virtual" tuples instead of materializing intermediate
tuple values everywhere. The earlier code looks quite similar, but it doesn't
suffer the problem because the data gets copied into another context as a
result of having to materialize ExecProject's output tuple.
sub-select contains a join alias reference that expands into an expression
containing another sub-select. Per yesterday's report from Merlin Moncure
and subsequent off-list investigation.
Back-patch to 7.4. Older versions didn't attempt to flatten sub-selects in
ways that would trigger this problem.
If such a Var appeared within a nested sub-select, we failed to translate it
correctly during pullup of the view, because the recursive call to
replace_rte_variables_mutator was looking for the wrong sublevels_up value.
Bug was introduced during the addition of the PlaceHolderVar mechanism.
Per bug #5514 from Marcos Castedo.
by the planning process. This prevents the "failed to locate grouping columns"
error recently reported by Dickson Guedes. That happens because planning
replaces SubLinks by SubPlans in the subquery's targetlist, and exprTypmod()
is smarter about the former than the latter, causing the apparent type of
the subquery's output columns to change. This seems to be a deficiency we
should fix in exprTypmod(), but that will be a much more invasive patch
with possible side-effects elsewhere, so I'll do that only in HEAD.
Back-patch to 8.3. Arguably the lack of a copying step is broken/dangerous
all the way back, but in the absence of known problems I'll refrain from
making the older branches pay the extra cost. (The reason this particular
symptom didn't appear before is that exprTypmod() wasn't smart about SubLinks
either, until 8.3.)
bug #4290. The fundamental bug is that masking extParam by outer_params,
as finalize_plan had been doing, caused us to lose the information that
an initPlan depended on the output of a sibling initPlan. On reflection
the best thing to do seemed to be not to try to adjust outer_params for
this case but get rid of it entirely. The only thing it was really doing
for us was to filter out param IDs associated with SubPlan nodes, and that
can be done (with greater accuracy) while processing individual SubPlan
nodes in finalize_primnode. This approach was vindicated by the discovery
that the masking method was hiding a second bug: SS_finalize_plan failed to
remove extParam bits for initPlan output params that were referenced in the
main plan tree (it only got rid of those referenced by other initPlans).
It's not clear that this caused any real problems, given the limited use
of extParam by the executor, but it's certainly not what was intended.
I originally thought that there was also a problem with needing to include
indirect dependencies on external params in initPlans' param sets, but it
turns out that the executor handles this correctly so long as the depended-on
initPlan is earlier in the initPlans list than the one using its output.
That seems a bit of a fragile assumption, but it is true at the moment,
so I just documented it in some code comments rather than making what would
be rather invasive changes to remove the assumption.
Back-patch to 8.1. Previous versions don't have the case of initPlans
referring to other initPlans' outputs, so while the existing logic is still
questionable for them, there are not any known bugs to be fixed. So I'll
refrain from changing them for now.
output is not of the same type that's needed for the IN comparison (ie,
where the parser inserted an implicit coercion above the subselect result).
We should record the coerced expression, not just a raw Var referencing
the subselect output, as the quantity that needs to be unique-ified if
we choose to implement the IN as Unique followed by a plain join.
As of 8.3 this error was causing crashes, as seen in bug #4113 from Javier
Hernandez, because the executor was being told to hash or sort the raw
subselect output column using operators appropriate to the coerced type.
In prior versions there was no crash because the executor chose the
hash or sort operators for itself based on the column type it saw.
However, that's still not really right, because what's unique for one data
type might not be unique for another. In corner cases we could get multiple
outputs of a row that should appear only once, as demonstrated by the
regression test case included in this commit.
However, this patch doesn't apply cleanly to 8.2 or before, and the code
involved has shifted enough over time that I'm hesitant to try to back-patch.
Given the lack of complaints from the field about such corner cases, I think
the bug may not be important enough to risk breaking other things with a
back-patch.
a MIN or MAX aggregate call into an indexscan: the initplan is being made at
the current query nesting level and so we shouldn't increment query_level.
Though usually harmless, this mistake could lead to bogus "plan should not
reference subplan's variable" failures on complex queries. Per bug report
from David Sanchez i Gregori.
from the other string-category types; this eliminates a lot of surprising
interpretations that the parser could formerly make when there was no directly
applicable operator.
Create a general mechanism that supports casts to and from the standard string
types (text,varchar,bpchar) for *every* datatype, by invoking the datatype's
I/O functions. These new casts are assignment-only in the to-string direction,
explicit-only in the other, and therefore should create no surprising behavior.
Remove a bunch of thereby-obsoleted datatype-specific casting functions.
The "general mechanism" is a new expression node type CoerceViaIO that can
actually convert between *any* two datatypes if their external text
representations are compatible. This is more general than needed for the
immediate feature, but might be useful in plpgsql or other places in future.
This commit does nothing about the issue that applying the concatenation
operator || to non-text types will now fail, often with strange error messages
due to misinterpreting the operator as array concatenation. Since it often
(not always) worked before, we should either make it succeed or at least give
a more user-friendly error; but details are still under debate.
Peter Eisentraut and Tom Lane
a SubLink expression into a rule query. Pre-8.1 we essentially did this
unconditionally; 8.1 tries to do it only when needed, but was missing a
couple of cases. Per report from Kyle Bateman. Add some regression test
cases covering this area.
cases: we can't just consider whether the subquery's output is unique on its
own terms, we have to check whether the set of output columns we are going to
use will be unique. Per complaint from Luca Pireddu and test case from
Michael Fuhr.
bigint variants). Clean up some inconsistencies in error message wording.
Fix scanint8 to allow trailing whitespace in INT64_MIN case. Update
int8-exp-three-digits.out, which seems to have been ignored by the last
couple of people to modify the int8 regression test, and remove
int8-exp-three-digits-win32.out which is thereby exposed as redundant.
Didier Moens. Bug is new in 7.4, and was caused by not updating everyplace
I should've when replacing locParam markers by allParam.
Add a regression test to catch related errors in future.
parameter to allow it to be forced off for comparison purposes.
Add ORDER BY clauses to a bunch of regression test queries that will
otherwise produce randomly-ordered output in the new regime.
Andres Freund
Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut
Thomas G. Lockhart