We support changing NO INHERIT constraint to INHERIT for constraints in
child relations when adding a constraint to some ancestor relation, and
also during pg_upgrade's schema restore; but other than those special
cases, command ALTER TABLE ADD CONSTRAINT should not be allowed to
change an existing constraint from NO INHERIT to INHERIT, as that would
require to process child relations so that they also acquire an
appropriate constraint, which we may not be in a position to do. (It'd
also be surprising behavior.)
It is conceivable that we want to allow ALTER TABLE SET NOT NULL to make
such a change; but in that case some more code is needed to implement it
correctly, so for now I've made that throw the same error message.
Also, during the prep phase of ALTER TABLE ADD CONSTRAINT, acquire locks
on all descendant tables; otherwise we might operate on child tables on
which no locks are held, particularly in the mode where a primary key
causes not-null constraints to be created on children.
Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/7d923a66-55f0-3395-cd40-81c142b5448b@gmail.com
In one of the many strange corner cases of multiple inheritance being
used, commit b0e96f3119 missed a CommandCounterIncrement() call after
updating the attnotnull flag during ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN, which caused
a catalog tuple to be update attempted twice in the same command, giving
rise to a "tuple already updated by self" error. Add the missing call
to solve that, and a test case that reproduces the scenario.
As a (perhaps surprising) secondary effect, this CCI addition triggers
another behavior change: when a primary key is added to a parent
partitioned table and the column in an existing partition does not have
a not-null constraint, we no longer error out. This will probably be a
welcome change by some users, and I think it's unlikely that anybody
will miss the old behavior.
Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/045dec3f-9b3d-aa44-0c99-85f6992306c7@gmail.com
A child table can specify a compression or storage method different
from its parents. This was previously an error. (But this was
inconsistently enforced because for example the settings could be
changed later using ALTER TABLE.) This now also allows an explicit
override if multiple parents have different compression or storage
settings, which was previously an error that could not be overridden.
The compression and storage properties remains unchanged in a child
inheriting from parent(s) after its creation, i.e., when using ALTER
TABLE ... INHERIT. (This is not changed.)
Before this change, the error detail would mention the first pair of
conflicting parent compression or storage methods. But with this
change it waits till the child specification is considered by which
time we may have encountered many such conflicting pairs. Hence the
error detail after this change does not include the conflicting
compression/storage methods. Those can be obtained from parent
definitions if necessary. The code to maintain list of all
conflicting methods or even the first conflicting pair does not seem
worth the convenience it offers. This change is inline with what we
do with conflicting default values.
Before this commit, the specified storage method could be stored in
ColumnDef::storage (CREATE TABLE ... LIKE) or ColumnDef::storage_name
(CREATE TABLE ...). This caused the MergeChildAttribute() and
MergeInheritedAttribute() to ignore a storage method specified in the
child definition since it looked only at ColumnDef::storage. This
commit removes ColumnDef::storage and instead uses
ColumnDef::storage_name to save any storage method specification. This
is similar to how compression method specification is handled.
Author: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/24656cec-d6ef-4d15-8b5b-e8dfc9c833a7@eisentraut.org
When building a MergeAppendPath which has child paths that are not
sorted correctly for the MergeAppend's sort order, we apply the cost of
sorting those paths to the MergeAppendPath costs.
Here we fix a bug where the number of tuples specified that needed to be
sorted was effectively pg_class.reltuples rather than the number of
expected row in the subpath. This effectively penalizes MergeAppend
plans any time any filter is present on the MergeAppend subpath as the
sort cost added is to sort all tuples in the table rather than just the
ones expected the path to return.
This did not affect UNION ALL type queries as the RelOptInfo tuples is
set from the subquery's path rows. It does affect MergeAppends uses for
inheritance and partitioned tables.
This is a long-standing bug introduced when MergeAppend was first added
in 11cad29c9. No backpatch as this could result in plan changes.
Author: Alexander Kuzmenkov
Reviewed-by: Ashutosh Bapat, Aleksander Alekseev, David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CALzhyqyhoXQDR-Usd_0HeWk%3DuqNLzoVeT8KhRoo%3DpV_KzgO3QQ%40mail.gmail.com
This command, when used to add a column on a parent table with a complex
inheritance tree, tried to update multiple times the same tuple in
pg_attribute for a child table when incrementing attinhcount, causing
failures with "tuple already updated by self" because of a missing
CommandCounterIncrement() between two updates.
This exists for a rather long time, so backpatch all the way down.
Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin
Author: Tender Wang
Reviewed-by: Richard Guo
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18297-b04cd83a55b51e35@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 12
When an UPDATE/DELETE/MERGE's target table is an old-style
inheritance tree, it's possible for the parent to get excluded
from the plan while some children are not. (I believe this is
only possible if we can prove that a CHECK ... NO INHERIT
constraint on the parent contradicts the query WHERE clause,
so it's a very unusual case.) In such a case, ExecInitModifyTable
mistakenly concluded that the first surviving child is the target
table, leading to at least two bugs:
1. The wrong table's statement-level triggers would get fired.
2. In v16 and up, it was possible to fail with "invalid perminfoindex
0 in RTE with relid nnnn" due to the child RTE not having permissions
data included in the query plan. This was hard to reproduce reliably
because it did not occur unless the update triggered some non-HOT
index updates.
In v14 and up, this is easy to fix by defining ModifyTable.rootRelation
to be the parent RTE in plain inheritance as well as partitioned cases.
While the wrong-triggers bug also appears in older branches, the
relevant code in both the planner and executor is quite a bit
different, so it would take a good deal of effort to develop and
test a suitable patch. Given the lack of field complaints about the
trigger issue, I'll desist for now. (Patching v11 for this seems
unwise anyway, given that it will have no more releases after next
month.)
Per bug #18147 from Hans Buschmann.
Amit Langote and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18147-6fc796538913ee88@postgresql.org
Now that ATExecDropConstraint doesn't recurse anymore, so it's wrong to
test privileges "during recursion" there. Move the check to
dropconstraint_internal, which is the place where recursion occurs.
In passing, remove now-useless 'recursing' argument to
ATExecDropConstraint.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/202309051744.y4mndw5gwzhh@alvherre.pgsql
It makes no sense to add a NO INHERIT not-null constraint to a child
table that already has one in that column inherited from its parent.
Disallow that, and add tests for the relevant cases.
Per complaint from Kyotaro Horiguchi. I also used part of his proposed
patch.
Co-authored-by: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20230828.161658.1184657435220765047.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com
We now create contype='n' pg_constraint rows for not-null constraints.
We propagate these constraints to other tables during operations such as
adding inheritance relationships, creating and attaching partitions and
creating tables LIKE other tables. We also spawn not-null constraints
for inheritance child tables when their parents have primary keys.
These related constraints mostly follow the well-known rules of
conislocal and coninhcount that we have for CHECK constraints, with some
adaptations: for example, as opposed to CHECK constraints, we don't
match not-null ones by name when descending a hierarchy to alter it,
instead matching by column name that they apply to. This means we don't
require the constraint names to be identical across a hierarchy.
For now, we omit them for system catalogs. Maybe this is worth
reconsidering. We don't support NOT VALID nor DEFERRABLE clauses
either; these can be added as separate features later (this patch is
already large and complicated enough.)
psql shows these constraints in \d+.
pg_dump requires some ad-hoc hacks, particularly when dumping a primary
key. We now create one "throwaway" not-null constraint for each column
in the PK together with the CREATE TABLE command, and once the PK is
created, all those throwaway constraints are removed. This avoids
having to check each tuple for nullness when the dump restores the
primary key creation.
pg_upgrading from an older release requires a somewhat brittle procedure
to create a constraint state that matches what would be created if the
database were being created fresh in Postgres 17. I have tested all the
scenarios I could think of, and it works correctly as far as I can tell,
but I could have neglected weird cases.
This patch has been very long in the making. The first patch was
written by Bernd Helmle in 2010 to add a new pg_constraint.contype value
('n'), which I (Álvaro) then hijacked in 2011 and 2012, until that one
was killed by the realization that we ought to use contype='c' instead:
manufactured CHECK constraints. However, later SQL standard
development, as well as nonobvious emergent properties of that design
(mostly, failure to distinguish them from "normal" CHECK constraints as
well as the performance implication of having to test the CHECK
expression) led us to reconsider this choice, so now the current
implementation uses contype='n' again. During Postgres 16 this had
already been introduced by commit e056c557ae, but there were some
problems mainly with the pg_upgrade procedure that couldn't be fixed in
reasonable time, so it was reverted.
In 2016 Vitaly Burovoy also worked on this feature[1] but found no
consensus for his proposed approach, which was claimed to be closer to
the letter of the standard, requiring an additional pg_attribute column
to track the OID of the not-null constraint for that column.
[1] https://postgr.es/m/CAKOSWNkN6HSyatuys8xZxzRCR-KL1OkHS5-b9qd9bf1Rad3PLA@mail.gmail.com
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Author: Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>
Reviewed-by: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Reviewed-by: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
This code is insufficiently covered by tests, so add a few small test
cases to immortalize its behavior before it gets rewritten completely by
the project to catalog NOT NULL constraints.
This reverts commit e056c557ae and minor later fixes thereof.
There's a few problems in this new feature -- most notably regarding
pg_upgrade behavior, but others as well. This new feature is not in any
way critical on its own, so instead of scrambling to fix it we revert it
and try again in early 17 with these issues in mind.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3801207.1681057430@sss.pgh.pa.us
A few buildfarm animals recently started complaining about the "child"
relation already existing. e056c557ae added a new child table to inherit.sql,
but triggers.sql, running in the same parallel group, also uses a child table.
Rename the new table to inh_child. It maybe worth renaming child, parent in
other tests as well, but that's work for another day.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20230407204530.52q3v5cu5x6dj676@awork3.anarazel.de
We now create pg_constaint rows for NOT NULL constraints with
contype='n'.
We propagate these constraints during operations such as adding
inheritance relationships, creating and attaching partitions, creating
tables LIKE other tables. We mostly follow the well-known rules of
conislocal and coninhcount that we have for CHECK constraints, with some
adaptations; for example, as opposed to CHECK constraints, we don't
match NOT NULL ones by name when descending a hierarchy to alter it;
instead we match by column number. This means we don't require the
constraint names to be identical across a hierarchy.
For now, we omit them from system catalogs. Maybe this is worth
reconsidering. We don't support NOT VALID nor DEFERRABLE clauses
either; these can be added as separate features later (this patch is
already large and complicated enough.)
This has been very long in the making. The first patch was written by
Bernd Helmle in 2010 to add a new pg_constraint.contype value ('n'),
which I (Álvaro) then hijacked in 2011 and 2012, until that one was
killed by the realization that we ought to use contype='c' instead:
manufactured CHECK constraints. However, later SQL standard
development, as well as nonobvious emergent properties of that design
(mostly, failure to distinguish them from "normal" CHECK constraints as
well as the performance implication of having to test the CHECK
expression) led us to reconsider this choice, so now the current
implementation uses contype='n' again.
In 2016 Vitaly Burovoy also worked on this feature[1] but found no
consensus for his proposed approach, which was claimed to be closer to
the letter of the standard, requiring additional pg_attribute columns to
track the OID of the NOT NULL constraint for that column.
[1] https://postgr.es/m/CAKOSWNkN6HSyatuys8xZxzRCR-KL1OkHS5-b9qd9bf1Rad3PLA@mail.gmail.com
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Author: Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>
Reviewed-by: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CACA0E642A0267EDA387AF2B%40%5B172.26.14.62%5D
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/AANLkTinLXMOEMz+0J29tf1POokKi4XDkWJ6-DDR9BKgU@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20110707213401.GA27098@alvh.no-ip.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1343682669-sup-2532@alvh.no-ip.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKOSWNkN6HSyatuys8xZxzRCR-KL1OkHS5-b9qd9bf1Rad3PLA@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220817181249.q7qvj3okywctra3c@alvherre.pgsql
Most of these calls were to generate some random data. These can be
replaced by appropriately adapted sha256() calls. To keep the diff
smaller, we wrap this into a helper function that produces the same
output format and length as the md5() call.
This will eventually allow these tests to pass in OpenSSL FIPS mode
(which does not allow MD5 use).
Similar work for other test suites will follow later.
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/dbbd927f-ef1f-c9a1-4ec6-c759778ac852@enterprisedb.com
We already tried to fix this in commits 3f7323cbb et al (and follow-on
fixes), but now it emerges that there are still unfixed cases;
moreover, these cases affect all branches not only pre-v14. I thought
we had eliminated all cases of making multiple clones of an UPDATE's
target list when we nuked inheritance_planner. But it turns out we
still do that in some partitioned-UPDATE cases, notably including
INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE, because ExecInitPartitionInfo thinks
it's okay to clone and modify the parent's targetlist.
This fix is based on a suggestion from Andres Freund: let's stop
abusing the ParamExecData.execPlan mechanism, which was only ever
meant to handle initplans, and instead solve the execution timing
problem by having the expression compiler move MULTIEXPR_SUBLINK steps
to the front of their expression step lists. This is feasible because
(a) all branches still in support compile the entire targetlist of
an UPDATE into a single ExprState, and (b) we know that all
MULTIEXPR_SUBLINKs do need to be evaluated --- none could be buried
inside a CASE, for example. There is a minor semantics change
concerning the order of execution of the MULTIEXPR's subquery versus
other parts of the parent targetlist, but that seems like something
we can get away with. By doing that, we no longer need to worry
about whether different clones of a MULTIEXPR_SUBLINK share output
Params; their usage of that data structure won't overlap.
Per bug #17800 from Alexander Lakhin. Back-patch to all supported
branches. In v13 and earlier, we can revert 3f7323cbb and follow-on
fixes; however, I chose to keep the SubPlan.subLinkId field added
in ccbb54c72. We don't need that anymore in the core code, but it's
cheap enough to fill, and removing a plan node field in a minor
release seems like it'd be asking for trouble.
Andres Freund and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17800-ff90866b3906c964@postgresql.org
959d00e9d added the ability to make use of an Append node instead of a
MergeAppend when we wanted to perform a scan of a partitioned table and
the required sort order was the same as the partitioned keys and the
partitioned table was defined in such a way that earlier partitions were
guaranteed to only contain lower-order values than later partitions.
However, previously we didn't allow these ordered partition scans for
LIST partitioned table when there were any partitions that allowed
multiple Datums. This was a very cheap check to make and we could likely
have done a little better by checking if there were interleaved
partitions, but at the time we didn't have visibility about which
partitions were pruned, so we still may have disallowed cases where all
interleaved partitions were pruned.
Since 475dbd0b7, we now have knowledge of pruned partitions, we can do a
much better job inside partitions_are_ordered().
Here we pass which partitions survived partition pruning into
partitions_are_ordered() and, for LIST partitioning, have it check to see
if any live partitions exist that are also in the new "interleaved_parts"
field defined in PartitionBoundInfo.
For RANGE partitioning we can relax the code which caused the partitions
to be unordered if a DEFAULT partition existed. Since we now know which
partitions were pruned, partitions_are_ordered() now returns true when the
DEFAULT partition was pruned.
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote, Zhihong Yu
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvrdoN_sXU52i=QDXe2k3WAo=EVry29r2+Tq2WYcn2xhEA@mail.gmail.com
The fix for CVE-2017-7484 disallowed use of pg_statistic data for
planning purposes if the user would not be able to select the associated
column and a non-leakproof function is to be applied to the statistics
values. That turns out to disable use of pg_statistic data in some
common cases involving inheritance/partitioning, where the user does
have permission to select from the parent table that was actually named
in the query, but not from a child table whose stats are needed. Since,
in non-corner cases, the user *can* select the child table's data via
the parent, this restriction is not actually useful from a security
standpoint. Improve the logic so that we also check the permissions of
the originally-named table, and allow access if select permission exists
for that.
When checking access to stats for a simple child column, we can map
the child column number back to the parent, and perform this test
exactly (including not allowing access if the child column isn't
exposed by the parent). For expression indexes, the current logic
just insists on whole-table select access, and this patch allows
access if the user can select the whole parent table. In principle,
if the child table has extra columns, this might allow access to
stats on columns the user can't read. In practice, it's unlikely
that the planner is going to do any stats calculations involving
expressions that are not visible to the query, so we'll ignore that
fine point for now. Perhaps someday we'll improve that logic to
detect exactly which columns are used by an expression index ...
but today is not that day.
Back-patch to v11. The issue was created in 9.2 and up by the
CVE-2017-7484 fix, but this patch depends on the append_rel_array[]
planner data structure which only exists in v11 and up. In
practice the issue is most urgent with partitioned tables, so
fixing v11 and later should satisfy much of the practical need.
Dilip Kumar and Amit Langote, with some kibitzing by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3876.1531261875@sss.pgh.pa.us
If a table inherits from multiple unrelated parents, we must disallow
changing the type of a column inherited from multiple such parents, else
it would be out of step with the other parents. However, it's possible
for the column to ultimately be inherited from just one common ancestor,
in which case a change starting from that ancestor should still be
allowed. (I would not be excited about preserving that option, were
it not that we have regression test cases exercising it already ...)
It's slightly annoying that this patch looks different from the logic
with the same end goal in renameatt(), and more annoying that it
requires an extra syscache lookup to make the test. However, the
recursion logic is quite different in the two functions, and a
back-patched bug fix is no place to be trying to unify them.
Per report from Manuel Rigger. Back-patch to 9.5. The bug exists in
9.4 too (and doubtless much further back); but the way the recursion
is done in 9.4 is a good bit different, so that substantial refactoring
would be needed to fix it in 9.4. I'm disinclined to do that, or risk
introducing new bugs, for a bug that has escaped notice for this long.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+u7OA4qogDv9rz1HAb-ADxttXYPqQdUdPY_yd4kCzywNxRQXA@mail.gmail.com
Before those commits, partitioning-related code in the executor could
assume that ModifyTableState.resultRelInfo[] contains only leaf partitions.
However, now a fully-pruned update results in a dummy ModifyTable that
references the root partitioned table, and that breaks some stuff.
In v11, this led to an assertion or core dump in the tuple routing code.
Fix by disabling tuple routing, since we don't need that anyway.
(I chose to do that in HEAD as well for safety, even though the problem
doesn't manifest in HEAD as it stands.)
In v10, this confused ExecInitModifyTable's decision about whether it
needed to close the root table. But we can get rid of that altogether
by being smarter about where to find the root table.
Note that since the referenced commits haven't shipped yet, this
isn't fixing any bug the field has seen.
Amit Langote, per a report from me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20710.1554582479@sss.pgh.pa.us
If we need ordered output from a scan of a partitioned table, but
the ordering matches the partition ordering, then we don't need to
use a MergeAppend to combine the pre-ordered per-partition scan
results: a plain Append will produce the same results. This
both saves useless comparison work inside the MergeAppend proper,
and allows us to start returning tuples after istarting up just
the first child node not all of them.
However, all is not peaches and cream, because if some of the
child nodes have high startup costs then there will be big
discontinuities in the tuples-returned-versus-elapsed-time curve.
The planner's cost model cannot handle that (yet, anyway).
If we model the Append's startup cost as being just the first
child's startup cost, we may drastically underestimate the cost
of fetching slightly more tuples than are available from the first
child. Since we've had bad experiences with over-optimistic choices
of "fast start" plans for ORDER BY LIMIT queries, that seems scary.
As a klugy workaround, set the startup cost estimate for an ordered
Append to be the sum of its children's startup costs (as MergeAppend
would). This doesn't really describe reality, but it's less likely
to cause a bad plan choice than an underestimated startup cost would.
In practice, the cases where we really care about this optimization
will have child plans that are IndexScans with zero startup cost,
so that the overly conservative estimate is still just zero.
David Rowley, reviewed by Julien Rouhaud and Antonin Houska
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f-hAqhPLRk_RaSFTgYxd=Tz5hA7kQ2h4-DhJufQk8TGuw@mail.gmail.com
In the case where inheritance_planner() finds that every table has
been excluded by constraints, it thought it could get away with
making a plan consisting of just a dummy Result node. While certainly
there's no updating or deleting to be done, this had two user-visible
problems: the plan did not report the correct set of output columns
when a RETURNING clause was present, and if there were any
statement-level triggers that should be fired, it didn't fire them.
Hence, rather than only generating the dummy Result, we need to
stick a valid ModifyTable node on top, which requires a tad more
effort here.
It's been broken this way for as long as inheritance_planner() has
known about deleting excluded subplans at all (cf commit 635d42e9c),
so back-patch to all supported branches.
Amit Langote and Tom Lane, per a report from Petr Fedorov.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/5da6f0f0-1364-1876-6978-907678f89a3e@phystech.edu
Previously tables declared WITH OIDS, including a significant fraction
of the catalog tables, stored the oid column not as a normal column,
but as part of the tuple header.
This special column was not shown by default, which was somewhat odd,
as it's often (consider e.g. pg_class.oid) one of the more important
parts of a row. Neither pg_dump nor COPY included the contents of the
oid column by default.
The fact that the oid column was not an ordinary column necessitated a
significant amount of special case code to support oid columns. That
already was painful for the existing, but upcoming work aiming to make
table storage pluggable, would have required expanding and duplicating
that "specialness" significantly.
WITH OIDS has been deprecated since 2005 (commit ff02d0a05280e0).
Remove it.
Removing includes:
- CREATE TABLE and ALTER TABLE syntax for declaring the table to be
WITH OIDS has been removed (WITH (oids[ = true]) will error out)
- pg_dump does not support dumping tables declared WITH OIDS and will
issue a warning when dumping one (and ignore the oid column).
- restoring an pg_dump archive with pg_restore will warn when
restoring a table with oid contents (and ignore the oid column)
- COPY will refuse to load binary dump that includes oids.
- pg_upgrade will error out when encountering tables declared WITH
OIDS, they have to be altered to remove the oid column first.
- Functionality to access the oid of the last inserted row (like
plpgsql's RESULT_OID, spi's SPI_lastoid, ...) has been removed.
The syntax for declaring a table WITHOUT OIDS (or WITH (oids = false)
for CREATE TABLE) is still supported. While that requires a bit of
support code, it seems unnecessary to break applications / dumps that
do not use oids, and are explicit about not using them.
The biggest user of WITH OID columns was postgres' catalog. This
commit changes all 'magic' oid columns to be columns that are normally
declared and stored. To reduce unnecessary query breakage all the
newly added columns are still named 'oid', even if a table's column
naming scheme would indicate 'reloid' or such. This obviously
requires adapting a lot code, mostly replacing oid access via
HeapTupleGetOid() with access to the underlying Form_pg_*->oid column.
The bootstrap process now assigns oids for all oid columns in
genbki.pl that do not have an explicit value (starting at the largest
oid previously used), only oids assigned later by oids will be above
FirstBootstrapObjectId. As the oid column now is a normal column the
special bootstrap syntax for oids has been removed.
Oids are not automatically assigned during insertion anymore, all
backend code explicitly assigns oids with GetNewOidWithIndex(). For
the rare case that insertions into the catalog via SQL are called for
the new pg_nextoid() function can be used (which only works on catalog
tables).
The fact that oid columns on system tables are now normal columns
means that they will be included in the set of columns expanded
by * (i.e. SELECT * FROM pg_class will now include the table's oid,
previously it did not). It'd not technically be hard to hide oid
column by default, but that'd mean confusing behavior would either
have to be carried forward forever, or it'd cause breakage down the
line.
While it's not unlikely that further adjustments are needed, the
scope/invasiveness of the patch makes it worthwhile to get merge this
now. It's painful to maintain externally, too complicated to commit
after the code code freeze, and a dependency of a number of other
patches.
Catversion bump, for obvious reasons.
Author: Andres Freund, with contributions by John Naylor
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180930034810.ywp2c7awz7opzcfr@alap3.anarazel.de
A ConvertRowtypeExpr is used to translate a whole-row reference of a
child to that of a parent. The planner produces nested
ConvertRowtypeExpr while translating whole-row reference of a leaf
partition in a multi-level partition hierarchy. Executor then
translates the whole-row reference from the leaf partition into all
the intermediate parent's whole-row references before arriving at the
final whole-row reference. It could instead translate the whole-row
reference from the leaf partition directly to the top-most parent's
whole-row reference skipping any intermediate translations.
Ashutosh Bapat, with tests by Kyotaro Horiguchi and some
editorialization by me. Reviewed by Andres Freund, Pavel Stehule,
Kyotaro Horiguchi, Dmitry Dolgov, Tom Lane.
While working on 1c7c317c and related things, which has clarified the
use of partitions with temporary tables, I have noticed that there could
be better coverage for inheritance trees mixing temporary and permanent
relations. A lot of cross-checks happen in MergeAttributes() which is
not designed for this purpose, so the tests added in this commit will
make sure that any kind of future refactoring will limit the amount of
compatibility breakage.
Author: Michael Paquier
Reviewed-by: Ashutosh Bapat
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180619022131.GE3314@paquier.xyz
One of the things canonicalize_qual() does is to remove constant-NULL
subexpressions of top-level AND/OR clauses. It does that on the assumption
that what it's given is a top-level WHERE clause, so that NULL can be
treated like FALSE. Although this is documented down inside a subroutine
of canonicalize_qual(), it wasn't mentioned in the documentation of that
function itself, and some callers hadn't gotten that memo.
Notably, commit d007a9505 caused get_relation_constraints() to apply
canonicalize_qual() to CHECK constraints. That allowed constraint
exclusion to misoptimize situations in which a CHECK constraint had a
provably-NULL subclause, as seen in the regression test case added here,
in which a child table that should be scanned is not. (Although this
thinko is ancient, the test case doesn't fail before 9.2, for reasons
I've not bothered to track down in detail. There may be related cases
that do fail before that.)
More recently, commit f0e44751d added an independent bug by applying
canonicalize_qual() to index expressions, which is even sillier since
those might not even be boolean. If they are, though, I think this
could lead to making incorrect index entries for affected index
expressions in v10. I haven't attempted to prove that though.
To fix, add an "is_check" parameter to canonicalize_qual() to specify
whether it should assume WHERE or CHECK semantics, and make it perform
NULL-elimination accordingly. Adjust the callers to apply the right
semantics, or remove the call entirely in cases where it's not known
that the expression has one or the other semantics. I also removed
the call in some cases involving partition expressions, where it should
be a no-op because such expressions should be canonical already ...
and was a no-op, independently of whether it could in principle have
done something, because it was being handed the qual in implicit-AND
format which isn't what it expects. In HEAD, add an Assert to catch
that type of mistake in future.
This represents an API break for external callers of canonicalize_qual().
While that's intentional in HEAD to make such callers think about which
case applies to them, it seems like something we probably wouldn't be
thanked for in released branches. Hence, in released branches, the
extra parameter is added to a new function canonicalize_qual_ext(),
and canonicalize_qual() is a wrapper that retains its old behavior.
Patch by me with suggestions from Dean Rasheed. Back-patch to all
supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/24475.1520635069@sss.pgh.pa.us
When we create an Append node, we can spread out the workers over the
subplans instead of piling on to each subplan one at a time, which
should typically be a bit more efficient, both because the startup
cost of any plan executed entirely by one worker is paid only once and
also because of reduced contention. We can also construct Append
plans using a mix of partial and non-partial subplans, which may allow
for parallelism in places that otherwise couldn't support it.
Unfortunately, this patch doesn't handle the important case of
parallelizing UNION ALL by running each branch in a separate worker;
the executor infrastructure is added here, but more planner work is
needed.
Amit Khandekar, Robert Haas, Amul Sul, reviewed and tested by
Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Langote, Rafia Sabih, Amit Kapila, and
Rajkumar Raghuwanshi.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAJ3gD9dy0K_E8r727heqXoBmWZ83HwLFwdcaSSmBQ1+S+vRuUQ@mail.gmail.com
Non-default range partitions have a constraint which include null
tests, and both default and non-default list partitions also have a
constraint which includes null tests, but for some reason this was
missed for default range partitions. This could cause the partition
constraint to evaluate to false for rows that were (correctly) routed
to that partition by insert tuple routing, which could in turn
cause constraint exclusion to prune the default partition in cases
where it should not.
Amit Langote, reviewed by Kyotaro Horiguchi
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/ba7aaeb1-4399-220e-70b4-62eade1522d0@lab.ntt.co.jp
Flattening the partitioning hierarchy at this stage makes various
desirable optimizations difficult. The original use case for this
patch was partition-wise join, which wants to match up the partitions
in one partitioning hierarchy with those in another such hierarchy.
However, it now seems that it will also be useful in making partition
pruning work using the PartitionDesc rather than constraint exclusion,
because with a flattened expansion, we have no easy way to figure out
which PartitionDescs apply to which leaf tables in a multi-level
partition hierarchy.
As it turns out, we end up creating both rte->inh and !rte->inh RTEs
for each intermediate partitioned table, just as we previously did for
the root table. This seems unnecessary since the partitioned tables
have no storage and are not scanned. We might want to go back and
rejigger things so that no partitioned tables (including the parent)
need !rte->inh RTEs, but that seems to require some adjustments not
related to the core purpose of this patch.
Ashutosh Bapat, reviewed by me and by Amit Langote. Some final
adjustments by me.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAFjFpRd=1venqLL7oGU=C1dEkuvk2DJgvF+7uKbnPHaum1mvHQ@mail.gmail.com
Previously, UNBOUNDED meant no lower bound when used in the FROM list,
and no upper bound when used in the TO list, which was OK for
single-column range partitioning, but problematic with multiple
columns. For example, an upper bound of (10.0, UNBOUNDED) would not be
collocated with a lower bound of (10.0, UNBOUNDED), thus making it
difficult or impossible to define contiguous multi-column range
partitions in some cases.
Fix this by using MINVALUE and MAXVALUE instead of UNBOUNDED to
represent a partition column that is unbounded below or above
respectively. This syntax removes any ambiguity, and ensures that if
one partition's lower bound equals another partition's upper bound,
then the partitions are contiguous.
Also drop the constraint prohibiting finite values after an unbounded
column, and just document the fact that any values after MINVALUE or
MAXVALUE are ignored. Previously it was necessary to repeat UNBOUNDED
multiple times, which was needlessly verbose.
Note: Forces a post-PG 10 beta2 initdb.
Report by Amul Sul, original patch by Amit Langote with some
additional hacking by me.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAJ_b947mowpLdxL3jo3YLKngRjrq9+Ej4ymduQTfYR+8=YAYQ@mail.gmail.com
Otherwise, set_plan_refs() can get applied to the same list
multiple times through different references, leading to chaos.
Amit Langote, Dilip Kumar, and Robert Haas, reviewed by Ashutosh
Bapat. Original report by Sveinn Sveinsson.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/20170517141151.1435.79890@wrigleys.postgresql.org
Partitioned tables do not contain any data; only their unpartitioned
descendents need to be scanned. However, the partitioned tables still
need to be locked, even though they're not scanned. To make that
work, Append and MergeAppend relations now need to carry a list of
(unscanned) partitioned relations that must be locked, and InitPlan
must lock all partitioned result relations.
Aside from the obvious advantage of avoiding some work at execution
time, this has two other advantages. First, it may improve the
planner's decision-making in some cases since the empty relation
might throw things off. Second, it paves the way to getting rid of
the storage for partitioned tables altogether.
Amit Langote, reviewed by me.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/6837c359-45c4-8044-34d1-736756335a15@lab.ntt.co.jp
Upcoming patches are revamping expression evaluation significantly. It
therefore seems prudent to try to ensure that the coverage of the
existing evaluation code is high.
This commit adds coverage for the cases that can reasonably be
tested. There's still a bunch of unreachable error messages and such,
but otherwise this achieves nearly full regression test coverage (with
the exception of the unused GetAttributeByNum/GetAttributeByName).
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170310194021.ek4bs4bl2khxkmll@alap3.anarazel.de
Record partitioned table dependencies as DEPENDENCY_AUTO
rather than DEPENDENCY_NORMAL, so that DROP TABLE just works.
Remove all the tests for partitioned tables where earlier
work had deliberately avoided using CASCADE.
Amit Langote, reviewed by Ashutosh Bapat and myself
Inheritance operations must treat the OID column, if any, much like
regular user columns. But MergeAttributesIntoExisting() neglected to
do that, leading to weird results after a table with OIDs is associated
to a parent with OIDs via ALTER TABLE ... INHERIT.
Report and patch by Amit Langote, reviewed by Ashutosh Bapat, some
adjustments by me. It's been broken all along, so back-patch to
all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/cb13cfe7-a48c-5720-c383-bb843ab28298@lab.ntt.co.jp
Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the
existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences.
The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may
not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no
sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called
partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an
implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not
allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions
can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent
does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the
correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed.
Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign
tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries.
Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List
partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can
involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an
expression.
Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it
is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of
partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation
for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner
optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on
the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it
seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible.
Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat,
Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova,
Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
It's not good for an inherited child constraint to be marked connoinherit;
that would result in the constraint not propagating to grandchild tables,
if any are created later. The code mostly prevented this from happening
but there was one case that was missed.
This is somewhat related to commit e55a946a8, which also tightened checks
on constraint merging. Hence, back-patch to 9.2 like that one. This isn't
so much because there's a concrete feature-related reason to stop there,
as to avoid having more distinct behaviors than we have to in this area.
Amit Langote
Discussion: <b28ee774-7009-313d-dd55-5bdd81242c41@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Historically, we've allowed users to add a CHECK constraint to a child
table and then add an identical CHECK constraint to the parent. This
results in "merging" the two constraints so that the pre-existing
child constraint ends up with both conislocal = true and coninhcount > 0.
However, if you tried to do it in the other order, you got a duplicate
constraint error. This is problematic for pg_dump, which needs to issue
separated ADD CONSTRAINT commands in some cases, but has no good way to
ensure that the constraints will be added in the required order.
And it's more than a bit arbitrary, too. The goal of complaining about
duplicated ADD CONSTRAINT commands can be served if we reject the case of
adding a constraint when the existing one already has conislocal = true;
but if it has conislocal = false, let's just make the ADD CONSTRAINT set
conislocal = true. In this way, either order of adding the constraints
has the same end result.
Another problem was that the code allowed creation of a parent constraint
marked convalidated that is merged with a child constraint that is
!convalidated. In this case, an inheritance scan of the parent table could
emit some rows violating the constraint condition, which would be an
unexpected result given the marking of the parent constraint as validated.
Hence, forbid merging of constraints in this case. (Note: valid child and
not-valid parent seems fine, so continue to allow that.)
Per report from Benedikt Grundmann. Back-patch to 9.2 where we introduced
possibly-not-valid check constraints. The second bug obviously doesn't
apply before that, and I think the first doesn't either, because pg_dump
only gets into this situation when dealing with not-valid constraints.
Report: <CADbMkNPT-Jz5PRSQ4RbUASYAjocV_KHUWapR%2Bg8fNvhUAyRpxA%40mail.gmail.com>
Discussion: <22108.1475874586@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Formerly, this function would always return "true" for an appendrel child
relation, because it would think that the appendrel parent was a potential
join target for the child. In principle that should only lead to some
inefficiency in planning, but fuzz testing by Andreas Seltenreich disclosed
that it could lead to "could not find pathkey item to sort" planner errors
in odd corner cases. Specifically, we would think that all columns of a
child table's multicolumn index were interesting pathkeys, causing us to
generate a MergeAppend path that sorts by all the columns. However, if any
of those columns weren't actually used above the level of the appendrel,
they would not get added to that rel's targetlist, which would result in
being unable to resolve the MergeAppend's sort keys against its targetlist
during createplan.c.
Backpatch to 9.3. In older versions, columns of an appendrel get added
to its targetlist even if they're not mentioned above the scan level,
so that the failure doesn't occur. It might be worth back-patching this
fix to older versions anyway, but I'll refrain for the moment.
Fix an oversight in commit b3aaf9081a1a95c245fd605dcf02c91b3a5c3a29: we do
indeed need to process the planner's append_rel_list when copying RTE
subqueries, because if any of them were flattenable UNION ALL subqueries,
the append_rel_list shows which subquery RTEs were pulled up out of which
other ones. Without this, UNION ALL subqueries aren't correctly inserted
into the update plans for inheritance child tables after the first one,
typically resulting in no update happening for those child table(s).
Per report from Victor Yegorov.
Experimentation with this case also exposed a fault in commit
a7b965382cf0cb30aeacb112572718045e6d4be7: if an inherited UPDATE/DELETE
was proven totally dummy by constraint exclusion, we might arrive at
add_rtes_to_flat_rtable with root->simple_rel_array being NULL. This
should be interpreted as not having any RelOptInfos. I chose to code
the guard as a check against simple_rel_array_size, so as to also
provide some protection against indexing off the end of the array.
Back-patch to 9.2 where the faulty code was added.
Alvaro Herrera
Peter Eisentraut
David Rowley
Michael Paquier
Tom Lane
Andres Freund
Andrew Gierth
Peter Eisentraut
Robert Haas
Dean Rasheed
Simon Riggs