Section 8.5.1.4, which defines these literals, made only a vague
reference to the fact that they might be evaluated too soon to be
safe in non-interactive contexts. Provide a more explicit caution
against misuse. Also, generalize the wording in the related tip in
section 9.9.4: while it clearly described this problem, it implied
(or really, stated outright) that the problem only applies to table
DEFAULT clauses.
Per gripe from Tijs van Dam. Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/c2LuRv9BiRT3bqIo5mMQiVraEXey_25B4vUn0kDqVqilwOEu_iVF1tbtvLnyQK7yDG3PFaz_GxLLPil2SDkj1MCObNRVaac-7j1dVdFERk8=@thalex.com
Commit a97e85f2b caused "exceed the available area" warnings in PDF
builds. Fine-tune colwidth values to avoid that.
Back-patch to 9.6, like the prior patch. (This is of dubious value
before v13, since we were far from free of such warnings in older
branches. But we might as well keep the SGML looking the same in all
branches.)
Per buildfarm.
Previously it was documented that toast_tuple_target affected column
marked as only External or Extended. But this description is not correct
and toast_tuple_target affects also column marked as Main.
Back-patch to v11 where toast_tuple_target reloption was introduced.
Author: Shinya Okano
Reviewed-by: Tatsuhito Kasahara, Fujii Masao
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/93f46e311a67422e89e770d236059817@oss.nttdata.com
Previously, a conversion such as
to_date('-44-02-01','YYYY-MM-DD')
would result in '0045-02-01 BC', as the code attempted to interpret
the negative year as BC, but failed to apply the correction needed
for our internal handling of BC years. Fix the off-by-one problem.
Also, arrange for the combination of a negative year and an
explicit "BC" marker to cancel out and produce AD. This is how
the negative-century case works, so it seems sane to do likewise.
Continue to read "year 0000" as 1 BC. Oracle would throw an error,
but we've accepted that case for a long time so I'm hesitant to
change it in a back-patch.
Per bug #16419 from Saeed Hubaishan. Back-patch to all supported
branches.
Dar Alathar-Yemen and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16419-d8d9db0a7553f01b@postgresql.org
Explicitly mention that primary key constraints are also included in the
limitation that the constraint columns must be a superset of the partition key
columns.
Wording suggestion from Tom Lane.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/64062533.78364.1601415362244@mail.yahoo.com
Backpatch-through: 11, where unique constraints on partitioned tables were added
Previously the standby server didn't archive timeline history files
streamed from the primary even when archive_mode is set to "always",
while it archives the streamed WAL files. This could cause the PITR to
fail because there was no required timeline history file in the archive.
The cause of this issue was that walreceiver didn't mark those files as
ready for archiving.
This commit makes walreceiver mark those streamed timeline history
files as ready for archiving if archive_mode=always. Then the archiver
process archives the marked timeline history files.
Back-patch to all supported versions.
Reported-by: Grigory Smolkin
Author: Grigory Smolkin, Fujii Masao
Reviewed-by: David Zhang, Anastasia Lubennikova
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/54b059d4-2b48-13a4-6f43-95a087c92367@postgrespro.ru
We have had multiple reports that point to the
'@colReorder=latn-digit' collation customization being buggy. We have
reported this to ICU and are waiting for a fix. In the meantime,
remove references to this from the documentation and replace it by
another reordering example. Apparently, many users have been picking
up this example specifically from the documentation.
Author: Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr@dalibo.com>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/153201618542.1404.3611626898935613264%40wrigleys.postgresql.org
The previous version of the docs mentioned that files are rewritten,
implying that a second copy of each file gets created, but each file is
updated in-place.
Author: Michael Banck
Reviewed-by: Daniel Gustafsson, Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/858086b6a42fb7d17995b6175856f7e7ec44d0a2.camel@credativ.de
Backpatch-through: 12
We were already raising an error for DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY on a
partitioned table, albeit a different and confusing one:
ERROR: DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY must be first action in transaction
Change that to throw a more comprehensible error:
ERROR: cannot drop partitioned index \"%s\" concurrently
Michael Paquier authored the test case for indexes on temporary
partitioned tables.
Backpatch to 11, where indexes on partitioned tables were added.
Reported-by: Jan Mussler <jan.mussler@zalando.de>
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16594-d2956ca909585067@postgresql.org
Back-patch key parts of 4c5cf5431 and 6ca547cf7 into stable branches.
I didn't touch pg_description entries here, so it's purely a docs
change; and I didn't fool with any examples either. The main point
is so that anyone who's wondering if factorial() exists in the stable
branches will be reassured.
Mark Dilger and John Naylor, with some adjustments by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/BE2DF53D-251A-4E26-972F-930E523580E9@enterprisedb.com
When the leftover invalid index is "ccold", there's no need to re-run
the command. Reword the instructions to make that explicit.
Backpatch to 12, where REINDEX CONCURRENTLY appeared.
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Reviewed-by: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200819211312.GA15497@alvherre.pgsql
The SimpleLruTruncate() header comment states the new coding rule. To
achieve this, add locktype "frozenid" and two LWLocks. This closes a
rare opportunity for data loss, which manifested as "apparent
wraparound" or "could not access status of transaction" errors. Data
loss is more likely in pg_multixact, due to released branches' thin
margin between multiStopLimit and multiWrapLimit. If a user's physical
replication primary logged ": apparent wraparound" messages, the user
should rebuild standbys of that primary regardless of symptoms. At less
risk is a cluster having emitted "not accepting commands" errors or
"must be vacuumed" warnings at some point. One can test a cluster for
this data loss by running VACUUM FREEZE in every database. Back-patch
to 9.5 (all supported versions).
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190218073103.GA1434723@rfd.leadboat.com
Up to now, upon receipt of a SIGTERM ("smart shutdown" command), the
postmaster has immediately killed all "optional" background processes,
and subsequently refused to launch new ones while it's waiting for
foreground client processes to exit. No doubt this seemed like an OK
policy at some point; but it's a pretty bad one now, because it makes
for a seriously degraded environment for the remaining clients:
* Parallel queries are killed, and new ones fail to launch. (And our
parallel-query infrastructure utterly fails to deal with the case
in a reasonable way --- it just hangs waiting for workers that are
not going to arrive. There is more work needed in that area IMO.)
* Autovacuum ceases to function. We can tolerate that for awhile,
but if bulk-update queries continue to run in the surviving client
sessions, there's eventually going to be a mess. In the worst case
the system could reach a forced shutdown to prevent XID wraparound.
* The bgwriter and walwriter are also stopped immediately, likely
resulting in performance degradation.
Hence, let's rearrange things so that the only immediate change in
behavior is refusing to let in new normal connections. Once the last
normal connection is gone, shut everything down as though we'd received
a "fast" shutdown. To implement this, remove the PM_WAIT_BACKUP and
PM_WAIT_READONLY states, instead staying in PM_RUN or PM_HOT_STANDBY
while normal connections remain. A subsidiary state variable tracks
whether or not we're letting in new connections in those states.
This also allows having just one copy of the logic for killing child
processes in smart and fast shutdown modes. I moved that logic into
PostmasterStateMachine() by inventing a new state PM_STOP_BACKENDS.
Back-patch to 9.6 where parallel query was added. In principle
this'd be a good idea in 9.5 as well, but the risk/reward ratio
is not as good there, since lack of autovacuum is not a problem
during typical uses of smart shutdown.
Per report from Bharath Rupireddy.
Patch by me, reviewed by Thomas Munro
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CALj2ACXAZ5vKxT9P7P89D87i3MDO9bfS+_bjMHgnWJs8uwUOOw@mail.gmail.com
Hostile objects located within the installation-time search_path could
capture references in an extension's installation or upgrade script.
If the extension is being installed with superuser privileges, this
opens the door to privilege escalation. While such hazards have existed
all along, their urgency increases with the v13 "trusted extensions"
feature, because that lets a non-superuser control the installation path
for a superuser-privileged script. Therefore, make a number of changes
to make such situations more secure:
* Tweak the construction of the installation-time search_path to ensure
that references to objects in pg_catalog can't be subverted; and
explicitly add pg_temp to the end of the path to prevent attacks using
temporary objects.
* Disable check_function_bodies within installation/upgrade scripts,
so that any security gaps in SQL-language or PL-language function bodies
cannot create a risk of unwanted installation-time code execution.
* Adjust lookup of type input/receive functions and join estimator
functions to complain if there are multiple candidate functions. This
prevents capture of references to functions whose signature is not the
first one checked; and it's arguably more user-friendly anyway.
* Modify various contrib upgrade scripts to ensure that catalog
modification queries are executed with secure search paths. (These
are in-place modifications with no extension version changes, since
it is the update process itself that is at issue, not the end result.)
Extensions that depend on other extensions cannot be made fully secure
by these methods alone; therefore, revert the "trusted" marking that
commit eb67623c9 applied to earthdistance and hstore_plperl, pending
some better solution to that set of issues.
Also add documentation around these issues, to help extension authors
write secure installation scripts.
Patch by me, following an observation by Andres Freund; thanks
to Noah Misch for review.
Security: CVE-2020-14350
In "High Availability, Load Balancing, and Replication" chapter,
certain descriptions of Pgpool-II were not correct at this point. It
does not need conflict resolution. Also "Multiple-Server Parallel
Query Execution" is not supported anymore.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200726.230128.53842489850344110.t-ishii%40sraoss.co.jp
Author: Tatsuo Ishii
Reviewed-by: Bruce Momjian
Backpatch-through: 9.5
Partitioned indexes are also registered in pg_inherits, but the
description of this catalog did not reflect that.
Author: Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87k0ynj35y.fsf@wibble.ilmari.org
Backpatch-through: 11
TLS 1.3 uses a different way of specifying ciphers and a different
OpenSSL API. PostgreSQL currently does not support setting those
ciphers. For now, just document this. In the future, support for
this might be added somehow.
Reviewed-by: Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org>
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
The executor checks for this error, and so does the bootstrap catalog
loader, but we never checked for it in retail catalog manipulations.
The folly of that has now been exposed, so let's add assertions
checking it. Checking in CatalogTupleInsert[WithInfo] and
CatalogTupleUpdate[WithInfo] should be enough to cover this.
Back-patch to v10; the aforesaid functions didn't exist before that,
and it didn't seem worth adapting the patch to the oldest branches.
But given the risk of JIT crashes, I think we certainly need this
as far back as v11.
Pre-v13, we have to explicitly exclude pg_subscription.subslotname
and pg_subscription_rel.srsublsn from the checks, since they are
mismarked. (Even if we change our mind about applying BKI_FORCE_NULL
in the branch tips, it doesn't seem wise to have assertions that
would fire in existing databases.)
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/298837.1595196283@sss.pgh.pa.us
This coding technique is unsafe, since we'd be accessing off the end
of the tuple if the field is null. SIGSEGV is pretty improbable, but
perhaps not impossible. Also, returning garbage for the LSN doesn't
seem like a great idea, even if callers aren't looking at it today.
Also update docs to point out explicitly that
pg_subscription.subslotname and pg_subscription_rel.srsublsn
can be null.
Perhaps we should mark these two fields BKI_FORCE_NULL, so that
they'd be correctly labeled in databases that are initdb'd in the
future. But we can't force that for existing databases, and on
balance it's not too clear that having a mix of different catalog
contents in the field would be wise.
Apply to v10 (where this code came in) through v12. Already
fixed in v13 and HEAD.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/732838.1595278439@sss.pgh.pa.us
pg_dump produces custom-format archive files that lack data offsets
when it is unable to seek its output. Up to now that's been a hazard
for pg_restore. But if pg_restore is able to seek in the archive
file, there is no reason to throw up our hands when asked to restore
data blocks out of order. Instead, whenever we are searching for a
data block, record the locations of the blocks we passed over (that
is, fill in the missing data-offset fields in our in-memory copy of
the TOC data). Then, when we hit a case that requires going
backwards, we can just seek back.
Also track the furthest point that we've searched to, and seek back
to there when beginning a search for a new data block. This avoids
possible O(N^2) time consumption, by ensuring that each data block
is examined at most twice. (On Unix systems, that's at most twice
per parallel-restore job; but since Windows uses threads here, the
threads can share block location knowledge, reducing the amount of
duplicated work.)
We can also improve the code a bit by using fseeko() to skip over
data blocks during the search.
This is all of some use even in simple restores, but it's really
significant for parallel pg_restore. In that case, we require
seekability of the input already, and we will very probably need
to do out-of-order restores.
Back-patch to v12, as this fixes a regression introduced by commit
548e50976. Before that, parallel restore avoided requesting
out-of-order restores, so it would work on a data-offset-less
archive. Now it will again.
Ideally this patch would include some test coverage, but there are
other open bugs that need to be fixed before we can extend our
coverage of parallel restore very much. Plan to revisit that later.
David Gilman and Tom Lane; reviewed by Justin Pryzby
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CALBH9DDuJ+scZc4MEvw5uO-=vRyR2=QF9+Yh=3hPEnKHWfS81A@mail.gmail.com
Re-point comp.ai.genetic FAQ link to a more stable address.
Remove stale links to AIX documentation; we don't really need to
tell AIX users how to use their systems.
Remove stale links to HP documentation about SSL. We've had to
update those twice before, making it increasingly obvious that
HP does not intend them to be stable landing points. They're
not particularly authoritative, either. (This change effectively
reverts bbd3bdba3.)
Daniel Gustafsson and Álvaro Herrera, per a gripe from
Kyotaro Horiguchi. Back-patch, since these links are
just as dead in the back branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200709.161226.204639179120026914.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com
pg_stat_activity.query text is truncated at 1024 bytes. But previously
the document described that it's truncated at 1024 characters.
This was not accurate when considering multibyte characters.
Back-patch to v10 where this inaccurate description was added.
Author: Atsushi Torikoshi
Reviewed-by: Daniel Gustafsson, Fujii Masao
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cd5b49a5a14e887542f5f569c1c6bde2@oss.nttdata.com
After running GetForeignRelSize for a foreign table, adjust rel->tuples
to be at least as large as rel->rows. This prevents bizarre behavior
in estimate_num_groups() and perhaps other places, especially in the
scenario where rel->tuples is zero because pg_class.reltuples is
(suggesting that ANALYZE has never been run for the table). As things
stood, we'd end up estimating one group out of any GROUP BY on such a
table, whereas the default group-count estimate is more likely to result
in a sane plan.
Also, clarify in the documentation that GetForeignRelSize has the option
to override the rel->tuples value if it has a better idea of what to use
than what is in pg_class.reltuples.
Per report from Jeff Janes. Back-patch to all supported branches.
Patch by me; thanks to Etsuro Fujita for review
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMkU=1xNo9cnan+Npxgz0eK7394xmjmKg-QEm8wYG9P5-CcaqQ@mail.gmail.com
Warnings start 10M transactions before xidStopLimit, which is 11M
transactions before wraparound. The sample WARNING output showed a
value greater than 11M, and its HINT message predated commit
25ec228ef7. Hence, the sample was
impossible. Back-patch to 9.5 (all supported versions).
The IANA time zone folk have deprecated use of a "posixrules" file in
the tz database. While for now it's our choice whether to keep
supplying one in our own builds, installations built with
--with-system-tzdata will soon be needing to cope with that file not
being present, at least on some platforms.
This causes a problem for the horology test, which expected the
nonstandard POSIX zone spec "CST7CDT" to apply pre-2007 US daylight
savings rules. That does happen if the posixrules file supplies such
information, but otherwise the test produces undesired results.
To fix, add an explicit transition date rule that matches 2005 practice.
(We could alternatively have switched the test to use some real time
zone, but it seems useful to have coverage of this type of zone spec.)
While at it, update a documentation example that also relied on
"CST7CDT"; use a real-world zone name instead. Also, document why
the zone names EST5EDT, CST6CDT, MST7MDT, PST8PDT aren't subject to
similar failures when "posixrules" is missing.
Back-patch to all supported branches, since the hazard is the same
for all.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1665379.1592581287@sss.pgh.pa.us
We'd glossed over most of this complexity for years, but it's hard
to avoid writing it all down now, so that we can explain what happens
when there's no "posixrules" file in the IANA time zone database.
That was at best a tiny minority situation till now, but it's likely
to become quite common in the future, so we'd better explain it.
Nonetheless, we don't really encourage people to use POSIX zone specs;
picking a named zone is almost always what you really want, unless
perhaps you're stuck with an out-of-date zone database. Therefore,
let's shove all this detail into an appendix.
Patch by me; thanks to Robert Haas for help with some awkward wording.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1390.1562258309@sss.pgh.pa.us
Our documentation failed to point out that REPEATABLE READ is really
snapshot isolation, which might be important to some users. Point to
the standard reference paper for this complicated topic.
Likewise, add a reference to the VLDB paper about PostgreSQL SSI, for
technical information about our SSI implementation and how it compares
to S2PL.
While here, add a note about catalog access using a lower isolation
level, per recent user complaint.
Back-patch to all releases.
Reported-by: Kyle Kingsbury <aphyr@jepsen.io>
Reviewed-by: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Reviewed-by: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Reviewed-by: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@sraoss.co.jp>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/db7b729d-0226-d162-a126-8a8ab2dc4443%40jepsen.io
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16454-9408996bb1750faf%40postgresql.org
In PostgreSQL 10, we stopped using System V semaphores on Linux
systems. Update the example we give of an error message from a
misconfigured system to show what people are most likely to see these
days.
Back-patch to 10, where PREFERRED_SEMAPHORES=UNNAMED_POSIX arrived.
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA%2BhUKGLmJUSwybaPQv39rB8ABpqJq84im2UjZvyUY4feYhpWMw%40mail.gmail.com
The group of wal_init_zero and wal_recycle is WAL_SETTINGS in guc.c,
but previously their documents were located in
"Replication"/"Sending Servers" section. This commit moves them to
the proper section "Write Ahead Log"/"Settings".
Back-patch to v12 where wal_init_zero and wal_recycle parameters
were introduced.
Author: Fujii Masao
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/b5190ab4-a169-6a42-0e49-aed0807c8976@oss.nttdata.com
The documentation of REINDEX includes a complete description of
CONCURRENTLY and its advantages as well as its disadvantages, but
reindexdb was not really clear about all that.
From discussion with Tom Lane, based on a report from Andrey Klychkov.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1590486572.205117372@f500.i.mail.ru
Backpatch-through: 12
These were missed when these were added to pg_hba.conf in PG 12;
updates docs and pg_hba.conf.sample.
Reported-by: Arthur Nascimento
Bug: 16380
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200421182736.GG19613@momjian.us
Backpatch-through: 12
The description missed a comma and lacked an explanation of what happens
with REPLICA IDENTITY USING INDEX when the dependent index is dropped.
Author: Marina Polyakova
Reviewed-by: Daniel Gustafsson, Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/ad1a0badc32658b1bbb07aa312346a1d@postgrespro.ru
Backpatch-through: 9.5
Moving this setting into the main configuration file was ill-considered,
perhaps, because that typically causes it to be set before
timezone_abbreviations has been set. Which in turn means that zone
abbreviations don't work, only full zone names.
We could imagine hacking things so that such cases do work, but the
stability of the hack would be questionable, and the value isn't really
that high. Instead just document that you should use a numeric zone
offset or a full zone name.
Per bug #16404 from Reijo Suhonen.
Back-patch to v12 where this was changed.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16404-4603a99603fbd04c@postgresql.org
Add a couple of lines to make it explicit that indexes, constraints,
triggers are added, removed, or left alone.
Backpatch to pg11.
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Reviewed-by: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200421162038.GA18628@alvherre.pgsql
When a partition is detached, any triggers that had been cloned from its
parent were not properly disentangled from its parent triggers.
This resulted in triggers that could not be dropped because they
depended on the trigger in the trigger in the no-longer-parent table:
ALTER TABLE t DETACH PARTITION t1;
DROP TRIGGER trig ON t1;
ERROR: cannot drop trigger trig on table t1 because trigger trig on table t requires it
HINT: You can drop trigger trig on table t instead.
Moreover the table can no longer be re-attached to its parent, because
the trigger name is already taken:
ALTER TABLE t ATTACH PARTITION t1 FOR VALUES FROM (1)TO(2);
ERROR: trigger "trig" for relation "t1" already exists
The former is a bug introduced in commit 86f575948c. (The latter is
not necessarily a bug, but it makes the bug more uncomfortable.)
To avoid the complexity that would be needed to tell whether the trigger
has a local definition that has to be merged with the one coming from
the parent table, establish the behavior that the trigger is removed
when the table is detached.
Backpatch to pg11.
Author: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20200408152412.GZ2228@telsasoft.com
Commit ac8623760 "fixed" a typo in an example of what would happen in
the event of a typo. Restore the original typo and add a comment about
its intentionality. Backpatch to 12 where the error was introduced.
Per report from irc user Nicolás Alvarez.
The docs explained that a SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE lock is needed on the
referenced table, but failed to say the same about the table being
altered. Since the page says that ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock is taken
unless otherwise stated, this left readers with the wrong conclusion.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/834603375.3470346.1586482852542@mail.yahoo.com
CREATE GROUP is an exact alias for CREATE ROLE, and CREATE USER is
almost an exact alias, as can easily be confirmed by checking the
code. So the man page syntax descriptions ought to match up. The
last few additions of role options seem to have forgotten to update
create_group.sgml, though. Fix that, and add a naggy reminder to
create_role.sgml in hopes of not forgetting again.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/158647836143.655.9853963229391401576@wrigleys.postgresql.org
