Don't deal with transaction timeout in PostgresMain(). Instead, release
transaction timeout activated by StartTransaction() in
CommitTransaction()/AbortTransaction()/PrepareTransaction(). Deal with both
enabling and disabling transaction timeout in assign_transaction_timeout().
Also, remove potentially flaky timeouts-long isolation test, which has no
guarantees to pass on slow/busy machines.
Reported-by: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20240215230856.pc6k57tqxt7fhldm%40awork3.anarazel.de
This commit adds timeout that is expected to be used as a prevention
of long-running queries. Any session within the transaction will be
terminated after spanning longer than this timeout.
However, this timeout is not applied to prepared transactions.
Only transactions with user connections are affected.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAhFRxiQsRs2Eq5kCo9nXE3HTugsAAJdSQSmxncivebAxdmBjQ%40mail.gmail.com
Author: Andrey Borodin <amborodin@acm.org>
Author: Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>
Author: Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Nikolay Samokhvalov <samokhvalov@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Reviewed-by: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
Reviewed-by: bt23nguyent <bt23nguyent@oss.nttdata.com>
Reviewed-by: Yuhang Qiu <iamqyh@gmail.com>
Under some circumstances, concurrent MERGE operations could lead to
inconsistent results, that varied according the plan chosen. This was
caused by a lack of rowmarks on the source relation, which meant that
EvalPlanQual rechecking was not guaranteed to return the same source
tuples when re-running the join query.
Fix by ensuring that preprocess_rowmarks() sets up PlanRowMarks for
all non-target relations used in MERGE, in the same way that it does
for UPDATE and DELETE.
Per bug #18103. Back-patch to v15, where MERGE was introduced.
Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Richard Guo.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18103-c4386baab8e355e3%40postgresql.org
The fix itself is fine, but the test revealed other problems related
to parallel query that are not easily fixable. Remove the test for
now to fix the buildfarm.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/88825.1691665432@sss.pgh.pa.us
Backpatch-through: 11
1. Make sure that we don't decrement SxactGlobalXminCount twice when
the SXACT_FLAG_RO_SAFE optimization is reached in a parallel query.
This could trigger a sanity check failure in assert builds. Non-assert
builds recompute the count in SetNewSxactGlobalXmin(), so the problem
was hidden, explaining the lack of field reports. Add a new isolation
test to exercise that case.
2. Remove an assertion that the DOOMED flag can't be set on a partially
released SERIALIZABLEXACT. Instead, ignore the flag (our transaction
was already determined to be read-only safe, and DOOMED is in fact set
during partial release, and there was already an assertion that it
wasn't set sooner). Improve an existing isolation test so that it
reaches that case (previously it wasn't quite testing what it was
supposed to be testing; see discussion).
Back-patch to 12. Bug #17116. Defects in commit 47a338cf.
Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17116-d6ca217acc180e30%40postgresql.org
Matviews have been discarded from needing predicate locks since 3bf3ab8
and their introduction. At this point, there was no concurrent flavor
of REFRESH yet, hence there was no meaning in having materialized views
look at read/write conflicts with concurrent transactions using
themselves the serializable isolation level because they could only be
refreshed with an access exclusive lock. CONCURRENTLY, on the contrary,
allows reads and writes during a refresh as it holds a share update
exclusive lock.
Some isolation tests are added to show the effect of the change, with a
combination of one table and a matview based on it, using a mix of
REFRESH CONCURRENTLY and read/write queries.
This could arguably be considered as a bug, but as it is a subtle
behavior change potentially impacting applications no backpatch is
done.
Author: Yugo Nagata
Reviewed-by: Richard Guo, Dilip Kumar, Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220726164434.42d4e33911b4b4fcf751c4e7@sraoss.co.jp
This commit adds two isolation tests for CLUSTER, using:
- A normal table, making sure that CLUSTER blocks and completes if the
table is locked by a concurrent session.
- A partitioned table with a partition owned by a different user. If
the partitioned table is locked by a concurrent session, CLUSTER on the
partitioned table should block. If the partition owned by a different
user is locked, CLUSTER on its partitioned table should complete and
skip the partition. 3f19e17 has added an early check to ignore such a
partition with a SQL regression test, but this was not checking that
CLUSTER should not block.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/YlqveniXn9AI6RFZ@paquier.xyz
They are to check the behavior of RI_FKey_check() and
ri_Check_Pk_Match(). A test case whereby RI_FKey_check() queries a
partitioned PK table under REPEATABLE READ isolation produces wrong
output due to a bug of the partition-descriptor logic and that is noted
as such in the comment in the test. A subsequent commit will fix the
bug and replace the buggy output by the correct one.
Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1627848.1636676261@sss.pgh.pa.us
When VACUUM set relfrozenxid before now, it set it to whatever value was
used to determine which tuples to freeze -- the FreezeLimit cutoff.
This approach was very naive. The relfrozenxid invariant only requires
that new relfrozenxid values be <= the oldest extant XID remaining in
the table (at the point that the VACUUM operation ends), which in
general might be much more recent than FreezeLimit.
VACUUM now carefully tracks the oldest remaining XID/MultiXactId as it
goes (the oldest remaining values _after_ lazy_scan_prune processing).
The final values are set as the table's new relfrozenxid and new
relminmxid in pg_class at the end of each VACUUM. The oldest XID might
come from a tuple's xmin, xmax, or xvac fields. It might even come from
one of the table's remaining MultiXacts.
Final relfrozenxid values must still be >= FreezeLimit in an aggressive
VACUUM (FreezeLimit still acts as a lower bound on the final value that
aggressive VACUUM can set relfrozenxid to). Since standard VACUUMs
still make no guarantees about advancing relfrozenxid, they might as
well set relfrozenxid to a value from well before FreezeLimit when the
opportunity presents itself. In general standard VACUUMs may now set
relfrozenxid to any value > the original relfrozenxid and <= OldestXmin.
Credit for the general idea of using the oldest extant XID to set
pg_class.relfrozenxid at the end of VACUUM goes to Andres Freund.
Author: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Reviewed-By: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Reviewed-By: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-WzkymFbz6D_vL+jmqSn_5q1wsFvFrE+37yLgL_Rkfd6Gzg@mail.gmail.com
MERGE performs actions that modify rows in the target table using a
source table or query. MERGE provides a single SQL statement that can
conditionally INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE rows -- a task that would otherwise
require multiple PL statements. For example,
MERGE INTO target AS t
USING source AS s
ON t.tid = s.sid
WHEN MATCHED AND t.balance > s.delta THEN
UPDATE SET balance = t.balance - s.delta
WHEN MATCHED THEN
DELETE
WHEN NOT MATCHED AND s.delta > 0 THEN
INSERT VALUES (s.sid, s.delta)
WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN
DO NOTHING;
MERGE works with regular tables, partitioned tables and inheritance
hierarchies, including column and row security enforcement, as well as
support for row and statement triggers and transition tables therein.
MERGE is optimized for OLTP and is parameterizable, though also useful
for large scale ETL/ELT. MERGE is not intended to be used in preference
to existing single SQL commands for INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE since there
is some overhead. MERGE can be used from PL/pgSQL.
MERGE does not support targetting updatable views or foreign tables, and
RETURNING clauses are not allowed either. These limitations are likely
fixable with sufficient effort. Rewrite rules are also not supported,
but it's not clear that we'd want to support them.
Author: Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Author: Simon Riggs <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Reviewed-by: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> (earlier versions)
Reviewed-by: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> (earlier versions)
Reviewed-by: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> (earlier versions)
Reviewed-by: Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
Reviewed-by: Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CANP8+jKitBSrB7oTgT9CY2i1ObfOt36z0XMraQc+Xrz8QB0nXA@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-WzkJdBuxj9PO=2QaO9-3h3xGbQPZ34kJH=HukRekwM-GZg@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20201231134736.GA25392@alvherre.pgsql
DROP INDEX needs to lock the index's table before the index itself,
else it will deadlock against ordinary queries that acquire the
relation locks in that order. This is correctly mechanized for
plain indexes by RangeVarCallbackForDropRelation; but in the case of
a partitioned index, we neglected to lock the child tables in advance
of locking the child indexes. We can fix that by traversing the
inheritance tree and acquiring the needed locks in RemoveRelations,
after we have acquired our locks on the parent partitioned table and
index.
While at it, do some refactoring to eliminate confusion between
the actual and expected relkind in RangeVarCallbackForDropRelation.
We can save a couple of syscache lookups too, by having that function
pass back info that RemoveRelations will need.
Back-patch to v11 where partitioned indexes were added.
Jimmy Yih, Gaurab Dey, Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/BYAPR05MB645402330042E17D91A70C12BD5F9@BYAPR05MB6454.namprd05.prod.outlook.com
When cleaning up temporary objects during process exit the cleanup could fail
with:
FATAL: cannot fetch toast data without an active snapshot
The bug is caused by RemoveTempRelationsCallback() not setting up a
snapshot. If an object with toasted catalog data needs to be cleaned up,
init_toast_snapshot() could fail with the above error.
Most of the time however the the problem is masked due to cached catalog
snapshots being returned by GetOldestSnapshot(). But dropping an object can
cause catalog invalidations to be emitted. If no further catalog accesses are
necessary between the invalidation processing and the next toast datum
deletion, the bug becomes visible.
It's easy to miss this bug because it typically happens after clients
disconnect and the FATAL error just ends up in the log.
Luckily temporary table cleanup at the next use of the same temporary schema
or during DISCARD ALL does not have the same problem.
Fix the bug by pushing a snapshot in RemoveTempRelationsCallback(). Also add
isolation tests for temporary object cleanup, including objects with toasted
catalog data.
A future HEAD only commit will add an assertion trying to make this more
visible.
Reported-By: Miles Delahunty
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAOFAq3BU5Mf2TTvu8D9n_ZOoFAeQswuzk7yziAb7xuw_qyw5gw@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 10-
REINDEX CONCURRENTLY run on a toast index or a toast relation could
corrupt the target indexes rebuilt, as a backend running in parallel
that manipulates toast values would directly release the lock on the
toast relation when its local operation is done, rather than releasing
the lock once the transaction that manipulated the toast values
committed.
The fix done here is simple: we now hold a ROW EXCLUSIVE lock on the
toast relation when saving or deleting a toast value until the
transaction working on them is committed, so as a concurrent reindex
happening in parallel would be able to wait for any activity and see any
new rows inserted (or deleted).
An isolation test is added to check after the case fixed here, which is
a bit fancy by design as it relies on allow_system_table_mods to rename
the toast table and its index to fixed names. This way, it is possible
to reindex them directly without any dependency on the OID of the
underlying relation. Note that this could not use a DO block either, as
REINDEX CONCURRENTLY cannot be run in a transaction block. The test is
backpatched down to 13, where it is possible, thanks to c4a7a39, to use
allow_system_table_mods in a test suite.
Reported-by: Alexey Ermakov
Analyzed-by: Andres Freund, Noah Misch
Author: Michael Paquier
Reviewed-by: Nathan Bossart
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17268-d2fb426e0895abd4@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 12
Allow a partition be detached from its partitioned table without
blocking concurrent queries, by running in two transactions and only
requiring ShareUpdateExclusive in the partitioned table.
Because it runs in two transactions, it cannot be used in a transaction
block. This is the main reason to use dedicated syntax: so that users
can choose to use the original mode if they need it. But also, it
doesn't work when a default partition exists (because an exclusive lock
would still need to be obtained on it, in order to change its partition
constraint.)
In case the second transaction is cancelled or a crash occurs, there's
ALTER TABLE .. DETACH PARTITION .. FINALIZE, which executes the final
steps.
The main trick to make this work is the addition of column
pg_inherits.inhdetachpending, initially false; can only be set true in
the first part of this command. Once that is committed, concurrent
transactions that use a PartitionDirectory will include or ignore
partitions so marked: in optimizer they are ignored if the row is marked
committed for the snapshot; in executor they are always included. As a
result, and because of the way PartitionDirectory caches partition
descriptors, queries that were planned before the detach will see the
rows in the detached partition and queries that are planned after the
detach, won't.
A CHECK constraint is created that duplicates the partition constraint.
This is probably not strictly necessary, and some users will prefer to
remove it afterwards, but if the partition is re-attached to a
partitioned table, the constraint needn't be rechecked.
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200803234854.GA24158@alvherre.pgsql
If a cross-partition UPDATE violates a constraint on the target partition,
and the columns in the new partition are in different physical order than
in the parent, the error message can reveal columns that the user does not
have SELECT permission on. A similar bug was fixed earlier in commit
804b6b6db4.
The cause of the bug is that the callers of the
ExecBuildSlotValueDescription() function got confused when constructing
the list of modified columns. If the tuple was routed from a parent, we
converted the tuple to the parent's format, but the list of modified
columns was grabbed directly from the child's RTE entry.
ExecUpdateLockMode() had a similar issue. That lead to confusion on which
columns are key columns, leading to wrong tuple lock being taken on tables
referenced by foreign keys, when a row is updated with INSERT ON CONFLICT
UPDATE. A new isolation test is added for that corner case.
With this patch, the ri_RangeTableIndex field is no longer set for
partitions that don't have an entry in the range table. Previously, it was
set to the RTE entry of the parent relation, but that was confusing.
NOTE: This modifies the ResultRelInfo struct, replacing the
ri_PartitionRoot field with ri_RootResultRelInfo. That's a bit risky to
backpatch, because it breaks any extensions accessing the field. The
change that ri_RangeTableIndex is not set for partitions could potentially
break extensions, too. The ResultRelInfos are visible to FDWs at least,
and this patch required small changes to postgres_fdw. Nevertheless, this
seem like the least bad option. I don't think these fields widely used in
extensions; I don't think there are FDWs out there that uses the FDW
"direct update" API, other than postgres_fdw. If there is, you will get a
compilation error, so hopefully it is caught quickly.
Backpatch to 11, where support for both cross-partition UPDATEs, and unique
indexes on partitioned tables, were added.
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote
Security: CVE-2021-3393
This fixes a bug in the edge case where, for a temp table, heap_page_prune()
can end up with a different horizon than heap_vacuum_rel(). Which can trigger
errors like "ERROR: cannot freeze committed xmax ...".
The bug was introduced due to interaction of a7212be8b9 "Set cutoff xmin more
aggressively when vacuuming a temporary table." with dc7420c2c9 "snapshot
scalability: Don't compute global horizons while building snapshots.".
The problem is caused by lazy_scan_heap() assuming that the only reason its
HeapTupleSatisfiesVacuum() call would return HEAPTUPLE_DEAD is if the tuple is
a HOT tuple, or if the tuple's inserting transaction has aborted since the
heap_page_prune() call. But after a7212be8b9 that was also possible in other
cases for temp tables, because heap_page_prune() uses a different visibility
test after dc7420c2c9.
The fix is fairly simple: Move the special case logic for temp tables from
vacuum_set_xid_limits() to the infrastructure introduced in dc7420c2c9. That
ensures that the horizon used for pruning is at least as aggressive as the one
used by lazy_scan_heap(). The concrete horizon used for temp tables is
slightly different than the logic in dc7420c2c9, but should always be as
aggressive as before (see comments).
A significant benefit to centralizing the logic procarray.c is that now the
more aggressive horizons for temp tables does not just apply to VACUUM but
also to e.g. HOT pruning and the nbtree killtuples logic.
Because isTopLevel is not needed by vacuum_set_xid_limits() anymore, I
undid the the related changes from a7212be8b9.
This commit also adds an isolation test ensuring that the more aggressive
vacuuming and pruning of temp tables keeps working.
Debugged-By: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Debugged-By: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Debugged-By: Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coek88@gmail.com>
Author: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20201014203103.72oke6hqywcyhx7s@alap3.anarazel.de
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20201015083735.derdzysdtqdvxshp@alap3.anarazel.de
Partitioning tuple route code assumes that the partition chosen while
descending the partition hierarchy is always the correct one. This is
true except when the partition is the default partition and another
partition has been added concurrently: the partition constraint changes
and we don't recheck it. This can lead to tuples mistakenly being added
to the default partition that should have been rejected.
Fix by rechecking the default partition constraint while descending the
hierarchy.
An isolation test based on the reproduction steps described by Hao Wu
(with tweaks for extra coverage) is included.
Backpatch to 12, where this bug came in with 898e5e3290.
Reported by: Hao Wu <hawu@vmware.com>
Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqFqBmcSSap4sFnCBUEL_VfOMmEKaQ3gwUhyfa4c7J_-nA@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/DM5PR0501MB3910E97A9EDFB4C775CF3D75A42F0@DM5PR0501MB3910.namprd05.prod.outlook.com
The isolation test added by a6642b3 is proving to be unstable, as once
the first transaction holding a lock on the top-most partitioned table
or on a partition commits, the commit order of the follow-up DROP TABLE
and REINDEX could become reversed depending on the timing.
The only part of the test that could be entirely reliable is the one
using a SHARE lock, allowing REINDEX to commit first, but it is the
least interesting of the set.
Per buildfarm members rorqual and mylodon.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1kFSBj-00062c-Mu@gemulon.postgresql.org
Until now, REINDEX was not able to work with partitioned tables and
indexes, forcing users to reindex partitions one by one. This extends
REINDEX INDEX and REINDEX TABLE so as they can accept a partitioned
index and table in input, respectively, to reindex all the partitions
assigned to them with physical storage (foreign tables, partitioned
tables and indexes are then discarded).
This shares some logic with schema and database REINDEX as each
partition gets processed in its own transaction after building a list of
relations to work on. This choice has the advantage to minimize the
number of invalid indexes to one partition with REINDEX CONCURRENTLY in
the event a cancellation or failure in-flight, as the only indexes
handled at once in a single REINDEX CONCURRENTLY loop are the ones from
the partition being working on.
Isolation tests are added to emulate some cases I bumped into while
developing this feature, particularly with the concurrent drop of a
leaf partition reindexed. However, this is rather limited as LOCK would
cause REINDEX to block in the first transaction building the list of
partitions.
Per its multi-transaction nature, this new flavor cannot run in a
transaction block, similarly to REINDEX SCHEMA, SYSTEM and DATABASE.
Author: Justin Pryzby, Michael Paquier
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Lubennikova
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/db12e897-73ff-467e-94cb-4af03705435f.adger.lj@alibaba-inc.com
When multiple relations are reindexed, a scan of pg_class is done first
to build the list of relations to work on. However the REINDEX logic
has never checked if a relation listed still exists when beginning the
work on it, causing for example sudden cache lookup failures.
This commit adds safeguards against dropped relations for REINDEX,
similarly to VACUUM or CLUSTER where we try to open the relation,
ignoring it if it is missing. A new option is added to the REINDEX
routines to control if a missed relation is OK to ignore or not.
An isolation test, based on REINDEX SCHEMA, is added for the concurrent
and non-concurrent cases.
Author: Michael Paquier
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Lubennikova
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200813043805.GE11663@paquier.xyz
SSI's HeapCheckForSerializableConflictOut() test failed to correctly
handle conditions involving a concurrently inserted tuple which is later
concurrently updated by a separate transaction . A SELECT statement
that called HeapCheckForSerializableConflictOut() could end up using the
same XID (updater's XID) for both the original tuple, and the successor
tuple, missing the XID of the xact that created the original tuple
entirely. This only happened when neither tuple from the chain was
visible to the transaction's MVCC snapshot.
The observable symptoms of this bug were subtle. A pair of transactions
could commit, with the later transaction failing to observe the effects
of the earlier transaction (because of the confusion created by the
update to the non-visible row). This bug dates all the way back to
commit dafaa3ef, which added SSI.
To fix, make sure that we check the xmin of concurrently inserted tuples
that happen to also have been updated concurrently.
Author: Peter Geoghegan
Reported-By: Kyle Kingsbury
Reviewed-By: Thomas Munro
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/db7b729d-0226-d162-a126-8a8ab2dc4443@jepsen.io
Backpatch: All supported versions
Previously, the speculative insert tests did not cover the case when a
tuple t is inserted into a table with a unique index on a column but
before it can insert into the index, a concurrent transaction has
inserted a conflicting value into the index and the insertion of tuple t
must be aborted.
The basic permutation is one session successfully inserts into the table
and an associated unique index while a concurrent session successfully
inserts into the table but discovers a conflict before inserting into
the index and must abort the insertion.
Several variants on this include:
- swap which session is successful
- first session insert transaction does not commit, so second session
must wait on a transaction lock
- first session insert does not "complete", so second session must wait
on a speculative insertion lock
Also, refactor the existing TOAST table upsert test to be in the same
spec and reuse the steps.
Author: Melanie Plageman, Ashwin Agrawal, Andres Freund
Reviewed-by: Andres Freund, Taylor Vesely
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAKRu_ZRmxy_OEryfY3G8Zp01ouhgw59_-_Cm8n7LzRH5BAvng@mail.gmail.com
As evidenced by bug #16036 this area is woefully under-tested. Add
fairly extensive tests for the combination.
Backpatch back to 9.6 - before that isolationtester was not capable
enough. While we don't backpatch tests all the time, future fixes to
trigger.c would potentially look different enough in 12+ from the
earlier branches that introducing bugs during backpatching is more
likely than normal. Also, it's just a crucial and undertested area of
the code.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16036-28184c90d952fb7f@postgresql.org
Backpatch: 9.6-, the earliest these tests work
In serializable mode, heap_hot_search_buffer() incorrectly acquired a
predicate lock on the root tuple, not the returned tuple that satisfied
the visibility checks. As explained in README-SSI, the predicate lock does
not need to be copied or extended to other tuple versions, but for that to
work, the correct, visible, tuple version must be locked in the first
place.
The original SSI commit had this bug in it, but it was fixed back in 2013,
in commit 81fbbfe335. But unfortunately, it was reintroduced a few months
later in commit b89e151054. Wising up from that, add a regression test
to cover this, so that it doesn't get reintroduced again. Also, move the
code that sets 't_self', so that it happens at the same time that the
other HeapTuple fields are set, to make it more clear that all the code in
the loop operate on the "current" tuple in the chain, not the root tuple.
Bug spotted by Andres Freund, analysis and original fix by Thomas Munro,
test case and some additional changes to the fix by Heikki Linnakangas.
Backpatch to all supported versions (9.4).
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20190731210630.nqhszuktygwftjty%40alap3.anarazel.de
Commit a1c1af2a1 added logic in the deadlock checker to handle lock
grouping, but it was very poorly tested, as evidenced by the bug
fixed in 3420851a2. Add a test case that exercises that a bit better
(and catches the bug --- if you revert 3420851a2, this will hang).
Since it's pretty hard to get parallel workers to take exclusive
regular locks that their parents don't already have, this test operates
by creating a deadlock among advisory locks taken in parallel workers.
To make that happen, we must override the parallel-safety labeling of
the advisory-lock functions, which we do by putting them in mislabeled,
non-inlinable wrapper functions.
We also have to remove the redundant PreventAdvisoryLocksInParallelMode
checks in lockfuncs.c. That seems fine though; if some user accidentally
does what this test is intentionally doing, not much harm will ensue.
(If there are any remaining bugs that are reachable that way, they're
probably reachable in other ways too.)
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3243.1564437314@sss.pgh.pa.us
This puts back reverted commit de87a084c0, with some bug fixes.
When two (or more) transactions are waiting for transaction T1 to release a
tuple-level lock, and transaction T1 upgrades its lock to a higher level, a
spurious deadlock can be reported among the waiting transactions when T1
finishes. The simplest example case seems to be:
T1: select id from job where name = 'a' for key share;
Y: select id from job where name = 'a' for update; -- starts waiting for T1
Z: select id from job where name = 'a' for key share;
T1: update job set name = 'b' where id = 1;
Z: update job set name = 'c' where id = 1; -- starts waiting for T1
T1: rollback;
At this point, transaction Y is rolled back on account of a deadlock: Y
holds the heavyweight tuple lock and is waiting for the Xmax to be released,
while Z holds part of the multixact and tries to acquire the heavyweight
lock (per protocol) and goes to sleep; once T1 releases its part of the
multixact, Z is awakened only to be put back to sleep on the heavyweight
lock that Y is holding while sleeping. Kaboom.
This can be avoided by having Z skip the heavyweight lock acquisition. As
far as I can see, the biggest downside is that if there are multiple Z
transactions, the order in which they resume after T1 finishes is not
guaranteed.
Backpatch to 9.6. The patch applies cleanly on 9.5, but the new tests don't
work there (because isolationtester is not smart enough), so I'm not going
to risk it.
Author: Oleksii Kliukin
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/B9C9D7CD-EB94-4635-91B6-E558ACEC0EC3@hintbits.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2815.1560521451@sss.pgh.pa.us
This reverts commits 3da73d6839 and de87a084c0.
This code has some tricky corner cases that I'm not sure are correct and
not properly tested anyway, so I'm reverting the whole thing for next
week's releases (reintroducing the deadlock bug that we set to fix).
I'll try again afterwards.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1hbXKQ-0003g1-0C@gemulon.postgresql.org
When two (or more) transactions are waiting for transaction T1 to release a
tuple-level lock, and transaction T1 upgrades its lock to a higher level, a
spurious deadlock can be reported among the waiting transactions when T1
finishes. The simplest example case seems to be:
T1: select id from job where name = 'a' for key share;
Y: select id from job where name = 'a' for update; -- starts waiting for X
Z: select id from job where name = 'a' for key share;
T1: update job set name = 'b' where id = 1;
Z: update job set name = 'c' where id = 1; -- starts waiting for X
T1: rollback;
At this point, transaction Y is rolled back on account of a deadlock: Y
holds the heavyweight tuple lock and is waiting for the Xmax to be released,
while Z holds part of the multixact and tries to acquire the heavyweight
lock (per protocol) and goes to sleep; once X releases its part of the
multixact, Z is awakened only to be put back to sleep on the heavyweight
lock that Y is holding while sleeping. Kaboom.
This can be avoided by having Z skip the heavyweight lock acquisition. As
far as I can see, the biggest downside is that if there are multiple Z
transactions, the order in which they resume after X finishes is not
guaranteed.
Backpatch to 9.6. The patch applies cleanly on 9.5, but the new tests don't
work there (because isolationtester is not smart enough), so I'm not going
to risk it.
Author: Oleksii Kliukin
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/B9C9D7CD-EB94-4635-91B6-E558ACEC0EC3@hintbits.com
This path previously was not reliably covered. There was some
heuristic coverage via insert-conflict-toast.spec, but that test is
not deterministic, and only tested for a somewhat specific bug.
Backpatch, as this is a complicated and otherwise untested code
path. Unfortunately 9.5 cannot handle two waiting sessions, and thus
cannot execute this test.
Triggered by a conversion with Melanie Plageman.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAKRu_a7hbyrk=wveHYhr4LbcRnRCG=yPUVoQYB9YO1CdUBE9Q@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 9.5-
Previously, while primary keys could be made on partitioned tables, it
was not possible to define foreign keys that reference those primary
keys. Now it is possible to do that.
Author: Álvaro Herrera
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote, Jesper Pedersen
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181102234158.735b3fevta63msbj@alvherre.pgsql
This adds the CONCURRENTLY option to the REINDEX command. A REINDEX
CONCURRENTLY on a specific index creates a new index (like CREATE
INDEX CONCURRENTLY), then renames the old index away and the new index
in place and adjusts the dependencies, and then drops the old
index (like DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY). The REINDEX command also has
the capability to run its other variants (TABLE, DATABASE) with the
CONCURRENTLY option (but not SYSTEM).
The reindexdb command gets the --concurrently option.
Author: Michael Paquier, Andreas Karlsson, Peter Eisentraut
Reviewed-by: Andres Freund, Fujii Masao, Jim Nasby, Sergei Kornilov
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/60052986-956b-4478-45ed-8bd119e9b9cf%402ndquadrant.com#74948a1044c56c5e817a5050f554ddee
Previously, the SERIALIZABLE isolation level prevented parallel query
from being used. Allow the two features to be used together by
sharing the leader's SERIALIZABLEXACT with parallel workers.
An extra per-SERIALIZABLEXACT LWLock is introduced to make it safe to
share, and new logic is introduced to coordinate the early release
of the SERIALIZABLEXACT required for the SXACT_FLAG_RO_SAFE
optimization, as follows:
The first backend to observe the SXACT_FLAG_RO_SAFE flag (set by
some other transaction) will 'partially release' the SERIALIZABLEXACT,
meaning that the conflicts and locks it holds are released, but the
SERIALIZABLEXACT itself will remain active because other backends
might still have a pointer to it.
Whenever any backend notices the SXACT_FLAG_RO_SAFE flag, it clears
its own MySerializableXact variable and frees local resources so that
it can skip SSI checks for the rest of the transaction. In the
special case of the leader process, it transfers the SERIALIZABLEXACT
to a new variable SavedSerializableXact, so that it can be completely
released at the end of the transaction after all workers have exited.
Remove the serializable_okay flag added to CreateParallelContext() by
commit 9da0cc35, because it's now redundant.
Author: Thomas Munro
Reviewed-by: Haribabu Kommi, Robert Haas, Masahiko Sawada, Kevin Grittner
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=0gXGYhtrVDWOTHS8SQQy_=S9xo+8oCxGLWZAOoeJ=yzQ@mail.gmail.com
Isolation test suite of GIN predicate locking was criticized for being too slow,
especially under Valgrind. This commit is intended to accelerate it. Tests are
simplified in the following ways.
1) Amount of data is reduced. We're now close to the minimal amount of data,
which produces at least one posting tree and at least two pages of entry
tree.
2) Three isolation tests are merged into one.
3) Only one tuple is queried from posting tree. So, locking of index is the
same, but tuple locks are not propagated to relation lock. Also, it is
faster.
4) Test cases itself are simplified. Now each test case run just one INSERT
and one SELECT involving GIN, which either conflict or not.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181204000740.ok2q53nvkftwu43a%40alap3.anarazel.de
Reported-by: Andres Freund
Tested-by: Andrew Dunstan
Author: Alexander Korotkov
Backpatch-through: 11
Inheritance trees can include temporary tables if the parent is
permanent, which makes possible the presence of multiple temporary
children from different sessions. Trying to issue a TRUNCATE on the
parent in this scenario causes a failure, so similarly to any other
queries just ignore such cases, which makes TRUNCATE work
transparently.
This makes truncation behave similarly to any other DML query working on
the parent table with queries which need to be work on the children. A
set of isolation tests is added to cover basic cases.
Reported-by: Zhou Digoal
Author: Amit Langote, Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15565-ce67a48d0244436a@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 9.4
When specified, this option allows VACUUM to skip the work on a relation
if there is a conflicting lock on it when trying to open it at the
beginning of its processing.
Similarly to autovacuum, this comes with a couple of limitations while
the relation is processed which can cause the process to still block:
- when opening the relation indexes.
- when acquiring row samples for table inheritance trees, partition trees
or certain types of foreign tables, and that a lock is taken on some
leaves of such trees.
Author: Nathan Bossart
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier, Andres Freund, Masahiko Sawada
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9EF7EBE4-720D-4CF1-9D0E-4403D7E92990@amazon.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20171201160907.27110.74730@wrigleys.postgresql.org
A caller of VACUUM can perform early lookup obtention which can cause
other sessions to block on the request done, causing potentially DOS
attacks as even a non-privileged user can attempt a vacuum fill of a
critical catalog table to block even all incoming connection attempts.
Contrary to TRUNCATE, a client could attempt a system-wide VACUUM after
building the list of relations to VACUUM, which can cause vacuum_rel()
or analyze_rel() to try to lock the relation but the operation would
just block. When the client specifies a list of relations and the
relation needs to be skipped, ownership checks are done when building
the list of relations to work on, preventing a later lock attempt.
vacuum_rel() already had the sanity checks needed, except that those
were applied too late. This commit refactors the code so as relation
skips are checked beforehand, making it safer to avoid too early locks,
for both manual VACUUM with and without a list of relations specified.
An isolation test is added emulating the fact that early locks do not
happen anymore, issuing a WARNING message earlier if the user calling
VACUUM is not a relation owner.
When a partitioned table is listed in a manual VACUUM or ANALYZE
command, its full list of partitions is fetched, all partitions get
added to the list to work on, and then each one of them is processed one
by one, with ownership checks happening at the later phase of
vacuum_rel() or analyze_rel(). Trying to do early ownership checks for
each partition is proving to be tedious as this would result in deadlock
risks with lock upgrades, and skipping all partitions if the listed
partitioned table is not owned would result in a behavior change
compared to how Postgres 10 has implemented vacuum for partitioned
tables. The original problem reported related to early lock queue for
critical relations is fixed anyway, so priority is given to avoiding a
backward-incompatible behavior.
Reported-by: Lloyd Albin, Jeremy Schneider
Author: Michael Paquier
Reviewed by: Nathan Bossart, Kyotaro Horiguchi
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/152512087100.19803.12733865831237526317@wrigleys.postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180812222142.GA6097@paquier.xyz
A caller of TRUNCATE could previously queue for an access exclusive lock
on a relation it may not have permission to truncate, potentially
interfering with users authorized to work on it. This can be very
intrusive depending on the lock attempted to be taken. For example,
pg_authid could be blocked, preventing any authentication attempt to
happen on a PostgreSQL instance.
This commit fixes the case of TRUNCATE so as RangeVarGetRelidExtended is
used with a callback doing the necessary ACL checks at an earlier stage,
avoiding lock queuing issues, so as an immediate failure happens for
unprivileged users instead of waiting on a lock that would not be
taken.
This is rather similar to the type of work done in cbe24a6 for CLUSTER,
and the code of TRUNCATE is this time refactored so as there is no
user-facing changes. As the commit for CLUSTER, no back-patch is done.
Reported-by: Lloyd Albin, Jeremy Schneider
Author: Michael Paquier
Reviewed by: Nathan Bossart, Kyotaro Horiguchi
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/152512087100.19803.12733865831237526317@wrigleys.postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180806165816.GA19883@paquier.xyz
An update that causes the tuple to be moved to a different partition was
missing out on re-constructing the to-be-updated tuple, based on the latest
tuple in the update chain. Instead, it's simply deleting the latest tuple
and inserting a new tuple in the new partition based on the old tuple.
Commit 2f17844104 didn't consider this case, so some of the updates were
getting lost.
In passing, change the argument order for output parameter in ExecDelete
and add some commentary about it.
Reported-by: Pavan Deolasee
Author: Amit Khandekar, with minor changes by me
Reviewed-by: Dilip Kumar, Amit Kapila and Alvaro Herrera
Backpatch-through: 11
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJ3gD9fRbEzDqdeDq1jxqZUb47kJn+tQ7=Bcgjc8quqKsDViKQ@mail.gmail.com
Up to now, it's been safe for plpgsql to store TOAST pointers in its
variables because the ActiveSnapshot for whatever query called the plpgsql
function will surely protect such TOAST values from being vacuumed away,
even if the owning table rows are committed dead. With the introduction of
procedures, that assumption is no longer good in "non atomic" executions
of plpgsql code. We adopt the slightly brute-force solution of detoasting
all TOAST pointers at the time they are stored into variables, if we're in
a non-atomic context, just in case the owning row goes away.
Some care is needed to avoid long-term memory leaks, since plpgsql tends
to run with CurrentMemoryContext pointing to its call-lifespan context,
but we shouldn't assume that no memory is leaked by heap_tuple_fetch_attr.
In plpgsql proper, we can do the detoasting work in the "eval_mcontext".
Most of the code thrashing here is due to the need to add this capability
to expandedrecord.c as well as plpgsql proper. In expandedrecord.c,
we can't assume that the caller's context is short-lived, so make use of
the short-term sub-context that was already invented for checking domain
constraints. In view of this repurposing, it seems good to rename that
variable and associated code from "domain_check_cxt" to "short_term_cxt".
Peter Eisentraut and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/5AC06865.9050005@anastigmatix.net
The principle behind the locking was not very well thought-out, and not
documented. Add a section in the README to explain how it's supposed to
work, and change the code so that it actually works that way.
This fixes two bugs:
1. If fast update was turned on concurrently, subsequent inserts to the
pending list would not conflict with predicate locks that were acquired
earlier, on entry pages. The included 'predicate-gin-fastupdate' test
demonstrates that. To fix, make all scans acquire a predicate lock on
the metapage. That lock represents a scan of the pending list, whether
or not there is a pending list at the moment. Forget about the
optimization to skip locking/checking for locks, when fastupdate=off.
2. If a scan finds no match, it still needs to lock the entry page. The
point of predicate locks is to lock the gabs between values, whether
or not there is a match. The included 'predicate-gin-nomatch' test
tests that case.
In addition to those two bug fixes, this removes some unnecessary locking,
following the principle laid out in the README. Because all items in
a posting tree have the same key value, a lock on the posting tree root is
enough to cover all the items. (With a very large posting tree, it would
possibly be better to lock the posting tree leaf pages instead, so that a
"skip scan" with a query like "A & B", you could avoid unnecessary conflict
if a new tuple is inserted with A but !B. But let's keep this simple.)
Also, some spelling fixes.
Author: Heikki Linnakangas with some editorization by me
Review: Andrey Borodin, Alexander Korotkov
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/0b3ad2c2-2692-62a9-3a04-5724f2af9114@iki.fi
This reverts commits d204ef6377,
83454e3c2b and a few more commits thereafter
(complete list at the end) related to MERGE feature.
While the feature was fully functional, with sufficient test coverage and
necessary documentation, it was felt that some parts of the executor and
parse-analyzer can use a different design and it wasn't possible to do that in
the available time. So it was decided to revert the patch for PG11 and retry
again in the future.
Thanks again to all reviewers and bug reporters.
List of commits reverted, in reverse chronological order:
f1464c5380 Improve parse representation for MERGE
ddb4158579 MERGE syntax diagram correction
530e69e59b Allow cpluspluscheck to pass by renaming variable
01b88b4df5 MERGE minor errata
3af7b2b0d4 MERGE fix variable warning in non-assert builds
a5d86181ec MERGE INSERT allows only one VALUES clause
4b2d44031f MERGE post-commit review
4923550c20 Tab completion for MERGE
aa3faa3c7a WITH support in MERGE
83454e3c2b New files for MERGE
d204ef6377 MERGE SQL Command following SQL:2016
Author: Pavan Deolasee
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier
This reverts the backend sides of commit 1fde38beaa.
I have, at least for now, left the pg_verify_checksums tool in place, as
this tool can be very valuable without the rest of the patch as well,
and since it's a read-only tool that only runs when the cluster is down
it should be a lot safer.
When an update moves a row between partitions (supported since
2f17844104), our normal logic for following update chains in READ
COMMITTED mode doesn't work anymore. Cross partition updates are
modeled as an delete from the old and insert into the new
partition. No ctid chain exists across partitions, and there's no
convenient space to introduce that link.
Not throwing an error in a partitioned context when one would have
been thrown without partitioning is obviously problematic. This commit
introduces infrastructure to detect when a tuple has been moved, not
just plainly deleted. That allows to throw an error when encountering
a deletion that's actually a move, while attempting to following a
ctid chain.
The row deleted as part of a cross partition update is marked by
pointing it's t_ctid to an invalid block, instead of self as a normal
update would. That was deemed to be the least invasive and most
future proof way to represent the knowledge, given how few infomask
bits are there to be recycled (there's also some locking issues with
using infomask bits).
External code following ctid chains should be updated to check for
moved tuples. The most likely consequence of not doing so is a missed
error.
Author: Amul Sul, editorialized by me
Reviewed-By: Amit Kapila, Pavan Deolasee, Andres Freund, Robert Haas
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAAJ_b95PkwojoYfz0bzXU8OokcTVGzN6vYGCNVUukeUDrnF3dw@mail.gmail.com
Hash index searches acquire predicate locks on the primary
page of a bucket. It acquires a lock on both the old and new buckets
for scans that happen concurrently with page splits. During a bucket
split, a predicate lock is copied from the primary page of an old
bucket to the primary page of a new bucket.
Author: Shubham Barai, Amit Kapila
Reviewed by: Amit Kapila, Alexander Korotkov, Thomas Munro
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CALxAEPvNsM2GTiXdRgaaZ1Pjd1bs+sxfFsf7Ytr+iq+5JJoYXA@mail.gmail.com
This makes it possible to turn checksums on in a live cluster, without
the previous need for dump/reload or logical replication (and to turn it
off).
Enabling checkusm starts a background process in the form of a
launcher/worker combination that goes through the entire database and
recalculates checksums on each and every page. Only when all pages have
been checksummed are they fully enabled in the cluster. Any failure of
the process will revert to checksums off and the process has to be
started.
This adds a new WAL record that indicates the state of checksums, so
the process works across replicated clusters.
Authors: Magnus Hagander and Daniel Gustafsson
Review: Tomas Vondra, Michael Banck, Heikki Linnakangas, Andrey Borodin
MERGE performs actions that modify rows in the target table
using a source table or query. MERGE provides a single SQL
statement that can conditionally INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE rows
a task that would other require multiple PL statements.
e.g.
MERGE INTO target AS t
USING source AS s
ON t.tid = s.sid
WHEN MATCHED AND t.balance > s.delta THEN
UPDATE SET balance = t.balance - s.delta
WHEN MATCHED THEN
DELETE
WHEN NOT MATCHED AND s.delta > 0 THEN
INSERT VALUES (s.sid, s.delta)
WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN
DO NOTHING;
MERGE works with regular and partitioned tables, including
column and row security enforcement, as well as support for
row, statement and transition triggers.
MERGE is optimized for OLTP and is parameterizable, though
also useful for large scale ETL/ELT. MERGE is not intended
to be used in preference to existing single SQL commands
for INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE since there is some overhead.
MERGE can be used statically from PL/pgSQL.
MERGE does not yet support inheritance, write rules,
RETURNING clauses, updatable views or foreign tables.
MERGE follows SQL Standard per the most recent SQL:2016.
Includes full tests and documentation, including full
isolation tests to demonstrate the concurrent behavior.
This version written from scratch in 2017 by Simon Riggs,
using docs and tests originally written in 2009. Later work
from Pavan Deolasee has been both complex and deep, leaving
the lead author credit now in his hands.
Extensive discussion of concurrency from Peter Geoghegan,
with thanks for the time and effort contributed.
Various issues reported via sqlsmith by Andreas Seltenreich
Authors: Pavan Deolasee, Simon Riggs
Reviewer: Peter Geoghegan, Amit Langote, Tomas Vondra, Simon Riggs
Discussion:
https://postgr.es/m/CANP8+jKitBSrB7oTgT9CY2i1ObfOt36z0XMraQc+Xrz8QB0nXA@mail.gmail.comhttps://postgr.es/m/CAH2-WzkJdBuxj9PO=2QaO9-3h3xGbQPZ34kJH=HukRekwM-GZg@mail.gmail.com
Alexander Korotkov
Dean Rasheed
Jeff Davis
Thomas Munro
Michael Paquier
Alvaro Herrera
Andres Freund
Peter Geoghegan
Tom Lane
Heikki Linnakangas
Peter Eisentraut
Amit Kapila
Teodor Sigaev
Simon Riggs
Magnus Hagander