5c067521 erroneously had coded bms_prev_member assuming that a bitmapword
would always hold 32 bits and started it's search on what it thought was the
highest 8-bits of the word. This was not the case if bitmapwords were 64
bits.
In passing add a test to exercise this function a little. Previously there was
no coverage at all.
David Rowly
After introducing usage of t_tid of inner or page high key for storing
number of attributes of tuple, validation of tuple's ItemPointer with
ItemPointerIsValid becomes incorrect, it's need to validate only blocknumber of
ItemPointer. Missing this causes a incorrect page deletion, fix that. Test is
added.
BTW, current contrib/amcheck doesn't fail on index corrupted by this way.
Also introduce BTreeTupleGetTopParent/BTreeTupleSetTopParent macroses to improve
code readability and to avoid possible confusion with page high key: high key
is used to store top-parent link for branch to remove.
Bug found by Michael Paquier, but bug doesn't exist in previous versions because
t_tid was set to P_HIKEY.
Author: Teodor Sigaev
Reviewer: Peter Geoghegan
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20180419052436.GA16000%40paquier.xyz
Results from buildfarm member opossum suggest that this doesn't work
quite right on that platform. We've seen issues with NaN support on
MIPS/NetBSD before ... allegedly they fixed this stuff back in 2010,
but maybe only for small values of "fixed".
If, in fact, opossum fails this test then I plan to revert it;
it's mainly for diagnostic purposes rather than something we'd
necessarily keep long-term. I think that the failures in window.sql
could be worked around with some code duplication, but I want to
verify my theory about the cause first.
In commit f0e4475, GetIndexOpClass was renamed to ResolveOpClass, but
the comment in typecmds.c didn't get the memo.
In objectaddress.c, missing 'of' in a comment.
Both noticed by Vik Fearing, patch is mine though.
Since it sets up an event trigger that would fire on DDL done by any
concurrent test script, the original scheduling is just an invitation
to irreproducible test failures. (The fact that we found a bug through
exactly such irreproducible test failures doesn't really change the
calculus here: this script is a hazard to anything that runs in parallel
with it today or might be added to that parallel group in future. No,
I don't believe that the trigger is protecting itself sufficiently to
avoid all possible trouble.)
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/5767.1523995174@sss.pgh.pa.us
EventTriggerTableRewrite crashed if there were table_rewrite triggers
present, but there had not been when the calling command started.
EventTriggerDDLCommandEnd called ddl_command_end triggers if present,
even if there had been no such triggers when the calling command started,
which would lead to a failure in pg_event_trigger_ddl_commands.
In both cases, fix by doing nothing; it's better to wait till the next
command when things will be properly initialized.
In passing, remove an elog(DEBUG1) call that might have seemed interesting
four years ago but surely isn't today.
We found this because of intermittent failures in the buildfarm. Thanks
to Alvaro Herrera and Andrew Gierth for analysis.
Back-patch to 9.5; some of this code exists before that, but the specific
hazards we need to guard against don't.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/5767.1523995174@sss.pgh.pa.us
On further reflection, commit e5d83995e didn't go far enough: pretty much
everywhere in the planner that examines a clause's is_pushed_down flag
ought to be changed to use the more complicated behavior where we also
check the clause's required_relids. Otherwise we could make incorrect
decisions about whether, say, a clause is safe to use as a hash clause.
Some (many?) of these places are safe as-is, either because they are
never reached while considering a parameterized path, or because there
are additional checks that would reject a pushed-down clause anyway.
However, it seems smarter to just code them all the same way rather
than rely on easily-broken reasoning of that sort.
In support of that, invent a new macro RINFO_IS_PUSHED_DOWN that should
be used in place of direct tests on the is_pushed_down flag.
Like the previous patch, back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/f8128b11-c5bf-3539-48cd-234178b2314d@proxel.se
Use the term "system catalog" rather than "system relation" in assorted
places where it's clearly referring to a table rather than, say, an
index. Use more natural word order in the header boilerplate, improve
some of the one-liner catalog descriptions, and fix assorted random
deviations from the normal boilerplate. All purely neatnik-ism, but
why not.
John Naylor, some additional cleanup by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJVSVGUeJmFB3h-NJ18P32NPa+kzC165nm7GSoGHfPaN80Wxcw@mail.gmail.com
In some cases a clause attached to an outer join can be pushed down into
the outer join's RHS even though the clause is not degenerate --- this
can happen if we choose to make a parameterized path for the RHS. If
the clause ends up attached to a lower outer join, we'd misclassify it
as being a "join filter" not a plain "filter" condition at that node,
leading to wrong query results.
To fix, teach extract_actual_join_clauses to examine each join clause's
required_relids, not just its is_pushed_down flag. (The latter now
seems vestigial, or at least in need of rethinking, but we won't do
anything so invasive as redefining it in a bug-fix patch.)
This has been wrong since we introduced parameterized paths in 9.2,
though it's evidently hard to hit given the lack of previous reports.
The test case used here involves a lateral function call, and I think
that a lateral reference may be required to get the planner to select
a broken plan; though I wouldn't swear to that. In any case, even if
LATERAL is needed to trigger the bug, it still affects all supported
branches, so back-patch to all.
Per report from Andreas Karlsson. Thanks to Andrew Gierth for
preliminary investigation.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/f8128b11-c5bf-3539-48cd-234178b2314d@proxel.se
I added this "optimization" on top of Amit Langote's 158b7bc6d7, but
the quick path is never taken because the partition uses a different
pg_type oid than its parent table (causing equalTupleDescs to return
false). Changing that requires more analysis and is too considered
dangerous at this point in the cycle, so revert it.
We might make it work someday, but not for pg11.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/825031be-942c-8c24-6163-13c27f217a3d@lab.ntt.co.jp
Amit Langote reported that partition prune was unable to work with
arrays, enums, etc, which led him to research the appropriate way to
match query clauses to partition keys: instead of searching for an exact
match of the expression's type, it is better to rely on the fact that
the expression qual has already been resolved to a specific operator,
and that the partition key is linked to a specific operator family.
With that info, it's possible to figure out the strategy and comparison
function to use for the pruning clause in a manner that works reliably
for pseudo-types also.
Include new test cases that demonstrate pruning where pseudotypes are
involved.
Author: Amit Langote, Álvaro Herrera
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2b02f1e9-9812-9c41-972d-517bdc0f815d@lab.ntt.co.jp
It appears that new fields introduced in 857f9c36 have inconsistent datatypes:
BTMetaPageData.btm_last_cleanup_num_heap_tuples is of float4 type,
while xl_btree_metadata.last_cleanup_num_heap_tuples is of double type.
IndexVacuumInfo.num_heap_tuples, which is a source of values for
both former fields is of double type. So, make both those fields in
BTMetaPageData and xl_btree_metadata use float8 type in order to match the
precision of the source. That shouldn't be double type, because we always
use types with explicit width in WAL.
Patch introduces incompatibility of on-disk format since 857f9c36 commit, but
that versions never was released, so just bump catalog version to avoid
possible confusion.
Author: Alexander Korortkov
Remove an obsolete reference to the 'afteritem' argument, which was
removed by commit bc292937. Add a comment that clarifies how
_bt_insertonpg() indirectly handles the insertion of high key items.
Author: Peter Geoghegan
New WAL record XLOG_BTREE_META_CLEANUP introduced in 857f9c36 has no handling
in btree_desc() and btree_identify(). This patch implements corresponding
handling.
Alexander Korotkov
Add several assertions that ensure that we're dealing with a pivot tuple
without non-key attributes where that's expected. Also, remove the
assertion within _bt_isequal(), restoring the v10 function signature. A
similar check will be performed for the page highkey within
_bt_moveright() in most cases. Also avoid dropping all objects within
regression tests, to increase pg_dump test coverage for INCLUDE indexes.
Rather than using infrastructure that's generally intended to be used
with reference counted heap tuple descriptors during truncation, use the
same function that was introduced to store flat TupleDescs in shared
memory (we use a temp palloc'd buffer). This isn't strictly necessary,
but seems more future-proof than the old approach. It also lets us
avoid including rel.h within indextuple.c, which was arguably a
modularity violation. Also, we now call index_deform_tuple() with the
truncated TupleDesc, not the source TupleDesc, since that's more robust,
and saves a few cycles.
In passing, fix a memory leak by pfree'ing truncated pivot tuple memory
during CREATE INDEX. Also pfree during a page split, just to be
consistent.
Refactor _bt_check_natts() to be more readable.
Author: Peter Geoghegan with some editorization by me
Reviewed by: Alexander Korotkov, Teodor Sigaev
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAH2-Wz%3DkCWuXeMrBCopC-tFs3FbiVxQNjjgNKdG2sHxZ5k2y3w%40mail.gmail.com
Clean up error messages relating to mistakes in .dat files: make sure they
provide the .dat file name and line number, not the place in the Perl
script that's reporting the problem. Adopt more uniform message phrasing,
too.
Make genbki.pl spit up on unrecognized field names in the input hashes.
Previously, it just silently ignored such fields, which could make a
misspelled field name into a very hard-to-decipher problem. (This is in
genbki.pl, *not* Catalog.pm, because we don't want reformat_dat_file.pl to
complain about unrecognized fields. We'd rather it silently dropped them,
to facilitate removing unwanted fields after a reorganization.)
Commit 54eff5311 did not account for the possibility that we'd have
a transaction snapshot due to default_transaction_isolation being
set high enough to require one. The transaction snapshot is enough
to hold back our advertised xmin and thus risk deadlock anyway.
The only way to get rid of that snap is to start a new transaction,
so let's do that instead. Also throw in an assert checking that we
really have gotten to a state where no xmin is being advertised.
Back-patch to 9.4, like the previous commit.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMkU=1ztk3TpQdcUNbxq93pc80FrXUjpDWLGMeVBDx71GHNwZQ@mail.gmail.com
Change things around so that proper quoting of values interpolated into
the BKI data by initdb is the responsibility of initdb, not something
we half-heartedly handle by putting double quotes into the raw BKI data.
(Note: experimentation shows that it still doesn't work to put a double
quote into the initial superuser username, but that's the fault of
inadequate quoting while interpolating the name into SQL scripts;
the BKI aspect of it works fine now.)
Having done that, we can remove the special-case handling of values
that look like "something" from genbki.pl, and instead teach it to
escape double --- and single --- quotes properly. This removes the
nowhere-documented need to treat those specially in the BKI source
data; whatever you write will be passed through unchanged into the
inserted data value, modulo Perl's rules about single-quoted strings.
Add documentation explaining the (pre-existing) handling of backslashes
in the BKI data.
Per an earlier discussion with John Naylor.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJVSVGUNao=-Q2-vAN3PYcdF5tnL5JAHwGwzZGuYHtq+Mk_9ng@mail.gmail.com
Formerly, Catalog.pm turned a C array type declaration in the catalog
header files into a SQL type, e.g., 'foo[]'. Along the way, genbki.pl
turned this into '_foo' for the purpose of type lookups, but wrote 'foo[]'
to postgres.bki. During bootstrap, bootscanner.l had to have a special
case rule to tokenize this, and then MapArrayTypeName() would turn 'foo[]'
into '_foo' one more time.
This seems unnecessarily complicated, especially since nobody cares that
much about the readability of postgres.bki. Instead, make Catalog.pm
convert the C declaration into '_foo' to start with, and preserve that
representation of the type name throughout bootstrap data processing.
Then rip out the special-case code in bootscanner.l and bootstrap.c.
This changes postgres.bki to the extent that array fields are now
declared like
proconfig = _text ,
rather than
proconfig = text[] ,
No documentation update, since the SGML docs didn't mention any of this
in the first place, and it's all pretty transparent to writers of
catalog header files anyway.
John Naylor
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJVSVGUNao=-Q2-vAN3PYcdF5tnL5JAHwGwzZGuYHtq+Mk_9ng@mail.gmail.com
During the bootstrap data format conversion, it seemed important for
verifiability's sake that the generated postgres.bki file stayed the same
as before. That resulted in adding a bunch of ad-hoc rules about when to
quote emitted data values, to match previous manual decisions that had
often quoted values unnecessarily. Now that the conversion is complete,
it seems fine to remove all those ad-hoc rules. The net actual effect on
the current contents of postgres.bki is that some fields that had been
quoted despite containing only digits or only "-" lose their unnecessary
quotes.
Also, now that genbki.pl will always quote values containing a backslash,
there's no need for bootscanner.l to allow unquoted octal escapes;
so simplify its production for "id" by removing that possibility.
John Naylor, slightly modified by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJVSVGUNao=-Q2-vAN3PYcdF5tnL5JAHwGwzZGuYHtq+Mk_9ng@mail.gmail.com
Review of commit 1eb6d652: It's pointless to add padding to the GID fields,
when the code that follows assumes that there is no alignment, and uses
memcpy(). Remove the pointless padding.
Update comments to note the new fields in the WAL records.
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/33b787bf-dc20-1161-54e9-3f3b607bf59d%40iki.fi
It turns out that after runtime partition pruning, Append's
first_partial_plan does not accurately represent partial plans to run,
if any of those got pruned. This could limit participation of workers
in some partial subplans, if other subplans got pruned. Fix it by
keeping an index of the first valid partial subplan in the state node,
determined at execnode Init time.
Author: David Rowley, with cosmetic changes by me.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f8o2Yd=rOP=Et3A0FWgF+gSAOkFSU6eNhnGzTPV7nN8sQ@mail.gmail.com
coverage report indicated that mark_invalid_subplans_as_finished() and
nearby code was not getting exercised by any tests. Add a new one which
has execution-time Params rather than only external Params to fix this.
In passing, David noticed that ab_q6 tests were not actually required to
have a generic plan. The tests were testing exec Params not external
Params, so there was no need for the PREPARE. Remove the PREPARE,
making these plain queries. (The new queries are called from
explain_parallel_append, which may be unnecessary since they don't
actually have a Parallel Append node, just an Append. But it doesn't
seem to hurt anything, either.)
Author: David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f--hopb6JBSDY4wiXTS3ZcDp-wparXjTQ1nzNdBa04Fog@mail.gmail.com
This reverts commit 4d0f6d3f20 ("Attempt to stabilize partition_prune
test output (2)"), and attempts to stabilize the test by using string
replacement to hide any loop count difference in parallel nodes.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/4475.1523628300@sss.pgh.pa.us
spg_text_leaf_consistent() supposed that it should compare only
Min(querylen, entrylen) bytes of the two strings, and then deal with
any excess bytes in one string or the other by assuming the longer
string is greater if the prefixes are equal. Quite aside from the
fact that that's just wrong in some locales (e.g., 'ch' is not less
than 'd' in cs_CZ), it also risked passing incomplete multibyte
characters to strcoll(), with ensuing bad results.
Instead, just pass the full strings to varstr_cmp, and let it decide
what to do about unequal-length strings.
Fortunately, this error doesn't imply any index corruption, it's just
that searches might return the wrong set of entries.
Per report from Emre Hasegeli, though this is not his patch.
Thanks to Peter Geoghegan for review and discussion.
This code was born broken, so back-patch to all supported branches.
In HEAD, I failed to resist the temptation to do a bit of cosmetic
cleanup/pgindent'ing on 710d90da1, too.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAE2gYzzb6K51VnTq5i5p52z+j9p2duEa-K1T3RrC_GQEynAKEg@mail.gmail.com
We had an Assert() preventing whole-row expressions from being used in
the SET clause of INSERT ON CONFLICT, but it seems unnecessary, given
some tests, so remove it. Add a new test to exercise the case.
Still at ExecInitPartitionInfo, we used map_partition_varattnos (which
constructs an attribute map, then calls map_variable_attnos) using
the same two relations many times in different expressions and with
different parameters. Constructing the map over and over is a waste.
To avoid this repeated work, construct the map once, and use
map_variable_attnos() directly instead.
Author: Amit Langote, per comments by me (Álvaro)
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180326142016.m4st5e34chrzrknk@alvherre.pgsql
Spelling access(2)'s second argument as "2" is just horrid.
POSIX makes no promises as to the numeric values of W_OK and related
macros. Even if it accidentally works as intended on every supported
platform, it's still unreadable and inconsistent with adjacent code.
In passing, don't spell "NULL" as "0" either. Yes, that's legal C;
no, it's not project style.
Back-patch, just in case the unportability is real and not theoretical.
(Most likely, even if a platform had different bit assignments for
access()'s modes, there'd not be an observable behavior difference
here; but I'm being paranoid today.)
Coverity complained about the lack of a check on the return value in
parse_jsonb_index_flags' last call of JsonbIteratorNext. Seems like
a reasonable gripe to me, especially since the code is depending on
that being WJB_DONE to not leak memory, so add a check.
In passing, improve a couple other places where the result was being
ignored, either by adding an assert or at least a cast to void.
Also, don't spell "WJB_DONE" as "0". That's horrid coding style,
and it wasn't consistent either.
Teach both base backups and pg_verify_checksums that if a page is new,
it does not have a checksum yet, so it shouldn't be verified.
Noted by Tomas Vondra, review by David Steele.
They were accidentally excluded when reverting the backend online
checksum functionality, and since they weren't built the incorrect
reference to a removed section also did not trigger a problem.
Author: Christoph Berg
Make it clear that a cluster has to be shut down cleanly before
pg_verify_checksum can be run against it.
Author: Michael Paquier
Review: Daniel Gustafsson
This option makes no sense when the cluster checksum state cannot be
changed, and should have been removed in the revert.
Author: Daniel Gustafsson
Review: Michael Paquier
In the wake of commit 50c6bb022, it's not necessary for ApplyRetrieveRule
to have a forUpdatePushedDown parameter. By the time control gets here for
any given view-referencing RTE, we should already have pushed down the
effects of any FOR UPDATE/SHARE clauses affecting the view from outer query
levels. Hence if we don't find a RowMarkClause at the current query level,
that's sufficient proof that there is no outer one either. This in turn
means we need no forUpdatePushedDown parameter for fireRIRrules.
I wonder whether we oughtn't also revert commit cba2d2717, since it now
seems likely that that was band-aiding around the bad effects of doing
FOR UPDATE pushdown and view expansion in the wrong order. However,
in the absence of evidence that the current coding of markQueryForLocking
is actually buggy (i.e. missing RTEs it ought to mark), it seems best to
leave it alone.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/24db7b8f-3de5-e25f-7ab9-d8848351d42c@gmail.com
Alvaro Herrera
Teodor Sigaev
Heikki Linnakangas
Magnus Hagander
Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut
Stephen Frost
Tatsuo Ishii