Previously, unless we had to add a NOT NULL constraint to the column,
this command resulted in updating only the index's relcache entry.
That's problematic when replication behavior is being driven off the
existence of a primary key: other sessions (and ours too for that
matter) failed to recalculate their opinion of whether the table can
be replicated. Add a relcache invalidation to fix it.
This has been broken since pg_class.relhaspkey was removed in v11.
Before that, updating the table's relhaspkey value sufficed to cause
a cache flush. Hence, backpatch to v11.
Report and patch by Hou Zhijie
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/OS0PR01MB5716EBE01F112C62F8F9B786947B9@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
While individual logical rewrite files were synced to disk, the directory was
not. On some filesystems that could lead to loosing directory entries after a
crash.
Reported-By: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Author: Nathan Bossart <bossartn@amazon.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/867F2E29-2782-4869-970E-B984C6D35A8F@amazon.com
Backpatch: 10-
The logic in charge of writing commit timestamps (enabled with
track_commit_timestamp) for subtransactions had a one-bug bug,
where it would be possible that commit timestamps go missing for the
last subtransaction committed.
While on it, simplify a bit the iteration logic in the loop writing the
commit timestamps, as per suggestions from Kyotaro Horiguchi and Tom
Lane, so as some variable initializations are not part of the loop
itself.
Issue introduced in 73c986a.
Analyzed-by: Alex Kingsborough
Author: Alex Kingsborough, Kyotaro Horiguchi
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/73A66172-4050-4F2A-B7F1-13508EDA2144@amazon.com
Backpatch-through: 10
Commit 859b3003de disabled building of extended stats for inheritance
trees, to prevent updating the same catalog row twice. While that
resolved the issue, it also means there are no extended stats for
declaratively partitioned tables, because there are no data in the
non-leaf relations.
That also means declaratively partitioned tables were not affected by
the issue 859b3003de addressed, which means this is a regression
affecting queries that calculate estimates for the whole inheritance
tree as a whole (which includes e.g. GROUP BY queries).
But because partitioned tables are empty, we can invert the condition
and build statistics only for the case with inheritance, without losing
anything. And we can consider them when calculating estimates.
It may be necessary to run ANALYZE on partitioned tables, to collect
proper statistics. For declarative partitioning there should no prior
statistics, and it might take time before autoanalyze is triggered. For
tables partitioned by inheritance the statistics may include data from
child relations (if built 859b3003de), contradicting the current code.
Report and patch by Justin Pryzby, minor fixes and cleanup by me.
Backpatch all the way back to PostgreSQL 10, where extended statistics
were introduced (same as 859b3003de).
Author: Justin Pryzby
Reported-by: Justin Pryzby
Backpatch-through: 10
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20210923212624.GI831%40telsasoft.com
Since commit 859b3003de we only build extended statistics for individual
relations, ignoring the child relations. This resolved the issue with
updating catalog tuple twice, but we still tried to use the statistics
when calculating estimates for the whole inheritance tree. When the
relations contain very distinct data, it may produce bogus estimates.
This is roughly the same issue 427c6b5b9 addressed ~15 years ago, and we
fix it the same way - by ignoring extended statistics when calculating
estimates for the inheritance tree as a whole. We still consider
extended statistics when calculating estimates for individual child
relations, of course.
This may result in plan changes due to different estimates, but if the
old statistics were not describing the inheritance tree particularly
well it's quite likely the new plans is actually better.
Report and patch by Justin Pryzby, minor fixes and cleanup by me.
Backpatch all the way back to PostgreSQL 10, where extended statistics
were introduced (same as 859b3003de).
Author: Justin Pryzby
Reported-by: Justin Pryzby
Backpatch-through: 10
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20210923212624.GI831%40telsasoft.com
Commit 7745bc352 intended to ensure that whole-row Vars would be
printed with "::type" decoration in all contexts where plain
"var.*" notation would result in star-expansion, notably in
ROW() and VALUES() constructs. However, it missed the case of
INSERT with a single-row VALUES, as reported by Timur Khanjanov.
Nosing around ruleutils.c, I found a second oversight: the
code for RowCompareExpr generates ROW() notation without benefit
of an actual RowExpr, and naturally it wasn't in sync :-(.
(The code for FieldStore also does this, but we don't expect that
to generate strictly parsable SQL anyway, so I left it alone.)
Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/efaba6f9-4190-56be-8ff2-7a1674f9194f@intrans.baku.az
We disallow altering a column datatype within a regular table,
if the table's rowtype is used as a column type elsewhere,
because we lack code to go around and rewrite the other tables.
This restriction should apply to partitioned tables as well, but it
was not checked because ATRewriteTables and ATPrepAlterColumnType
were not on the same page about who should do it for which relkinds.
Per bug #17351 from Alexander Lakhin. Back-patch to all supported
branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17351-6db1870f3f4f612a@postgresql.org
get_rel_sync_entry(), which is called each time a change needs to be
logically replicated, is a rather hot code path in the WAL sender
sending logical changes. This code path was doing a relcache access on
relkind and relpartition for each logical change, but we only need to
know this information when building or re-building the cached
information for a relation.
Some measurements prove that this is noticeable in perf profiles,
particularly when attempting to replicate changes from relations that
are not published as these cause less overhead in the WAL sender,
delaying further the replication of changes for relations that are
published.
Issue introduced in 83fd453.
Author: Hou Zhijie
Reviewed-by: Kyotaro Horiguchi, Euler Taveira
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/OS0PR01MB5716E863AA9E591C1F010F7A947D9@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Backpatch-through: 13
Under concurrency, it is possible for two sessions to be merrily locking
and releasing a tuple and marking it again as HEAP_XMAX_INVALID all the
while a third session attempts to lock it, miserably fails at it, and
then contemplates life, the universe and everything only to eventually
fail an assertion that said bit is not set. Before SKIP LOCKED that was
indeed a reasonable expectation, but alas! commit df630b0dd5 falsified
it.
This bug is as old as time itself, and even older, if you think time
begins with the oldest supported branch. Therefore, backpatch to all
supported branches.
Author: Simon Riggs <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CANbhV-FeEwMnN8yuMyss7if1ZKjOKfjcgqB26n8pqu1e=q0ebg@mail.gmail.com
Commit 4ace45677 failed to fix the problem fully, because the
same issue of attempting to fetch a non-returnable index column
can occur when rechecking the indexqual after using a lossy index
operator. Moreover, it broke EXPLAIN for such indexquals (which
indicates a gap in our test cases :-().
Revert the code changes of 4ace45677 in favor of adding a new field
to struct IndexOnlyScan, containing a version of the indexqual that
can be executed against the index-returned tuple without using any
non-returnable columns. (The restrictions imposed by check_index_only
guarantee this is possible, although we may have to recompute indexed
expressions.) Support construction of that during setrefs.c
processing by marking IndexOnlyScan.indextlist entries as resjunk
if they can't be returned, rather than removing them entirely.
(We could alternatively require setrefs.c to look up the IndexOptInfo
again, but abusing resjunk this way seems like a reasonably safe way
to avoid needing to do that.)
This solution isn't great from an API-stability standpoint: if there
are any extensions out there that build IndexOnlyScan structs directly,
they'll be broken in the next minor releases. However, only a very
invasive extension would be likely to do such a thing. There's no
change in the Path representation, so typical planner extensions
shouldn't have a problem.
As before, back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3179992.1641150853@sss.pgh.pa.us
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17350-b5bdcf476e5badbb@postgresql.org
If an index has both returnable and non-returnable columns, and one of
the non-returnable columns is an expression using a Var that is in a
returnable column, then a query returning that expression could result
in an index-only scan plan that attempts to read the non-returnable
column, instead of recomputing the expression from the returnable
column as intended.
To fix, redefine the "indextlist" list of an IndexOnlyScan plan node
as containing null Consts in place of any non-returnable columns.
This solves the problem by preventing setrefs.c from falsely matching
to such entries. The executor is happy since it only cares about the
exposed types of the entries, and ruleutils.c doesn't care because a
correct plan won't reference those entries. I considered some other
ways to prevent setrefs.c from doing the wrong thing, but this way
seems good since (a) it allows a very localized fix, (b) it makes
the indextlist structure more compact in many cases, and (c) the
indextlist is now a more faithful representation of what the index AM
will actually produce, viz. nulls for any non-returnable columns.
This is easier to hit since we introduced included columns, but it's
possible to construct failing examples without that, as per the
added regression test. Hence, back-patch to all supported branches.
Per bug #17350 from Louis Jachiet.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17350-b5bdcf476e5badbb@postgresql.org
Fix the code changed by commit 5c056b0c2 so that we always generate
RelabelType, not something else, for a cast to unspecified typmod.
Otherwise planner optimizations might not happen.
It appears we missed this point because the previous experiments were
done on type numeric: the parser undesirably generates a call on the
numeric() length-coercion function, but then numeric_support()
optimizes that down to a RelabelType, so that everything seems fine.
It misbehaves for types that have a non-optimized length coercion
function, such as bpchar.
Per report from John Naylor. Back-patch to all supported branches,
as the previous patch eventually was. Unfortunately, that no longer
includes 9.6 ... we really shouldn't put this type of change into a
nearly-EOL branch.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFBsxsEfbFHEkouc+FSj+3K1sHipLPbEC67L0SAe-9-da8QtYg@mail.gmail.com
This could only matter if (a) long is wider than int, and (b) the heap
of free blocks exceeds UINT_MAX entries, which seems pretty unlikely.
Still, it's a theoretical bug, so backpatch to v13 where the typo came
in (in commit c02fdc922).
In passing, also make swap_nodes() use consistent datatypes.
Ma Liangzhu
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17336-fc4e522d26a750fd@postgresql.org
When using replication origins, pg_replication_origin_xact_setup() is an
optional choice to be able to set a LSN and a timestamp to mark the
origin, which would be additionally added to WAL for transaction commits
or aborts (including 2PC transactions). An assertion in the code path
of PREPARE TRANSACTION assumed that this data should always be set, so
it would trigger when using replication origins without setting up an
origin LSN. Some tests are added to cover more this kind of scenario.
Oversight in commit 1eb6d65.
Per discussion with Amit Kapila and Masahiko Sawada.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/YbbBfNSvMm5nIINV@paquier.xyz
Backpatch-through: 11
We publish the child table's data twice for a publication that has both
child and parent tables and is published with publish_via_partition_root
as true. This happens because subscribers will initiate synchronization
using both parent and child tables, since it gets both as separate tables
in the initial table list.
Ensure that pg_publication_tables returns only parent tables in such
cases.
Author: Hou Zhijie
Reviewed-by: Greg Nancarrow, Amit Langote, Vignesh C, Amit Kapila
Backpatch-through: 13
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/OS0PR01MB57167F45D481F78CDC5986F794B99@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
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
Further experimentation shows that commit 6051857fc is not sufficient
when using (some versions of?) OpenSSL. The reason is obscure, but
calling shutdown(socket, SD_SEND) improves matters.
Per testing by Andrew Dunstan and Alexander Lakhin.
Back-patch as before.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/af5e0bf3-6a61-bb97-6cba-061ddf22ff6b@dunslane.net
It turns out that this is necessary to keep Winsock from dropping any
not-yet-sent data, such as an error message explaining the reason for
process termination. It's pretty weird that the implicit close done
by the kernel acts differently from an explicit close, but it's hard
to argue with experimental results.
Independently submitted by Alexander Lakhin and Lars Kanis (comments
by me, though). Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/90b34057-4176-7bb0-0dbb-9822a5f6425b@greiz-reinsdorf.de
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16678-253e48d34dc0c376@postgresql.org
The various ALTER OWNER routines tend to leak memory in
CurrentMemoryContext. That's not a problem when they're only called
once per command; but in this usage where we might be touching many
objects, it can amount to a serious memory leak. Fix that by running
each call in a short-lived context.
(DROP OWNED BY likely has a similar issue, except that you'll probably
run out of lock table space before noticing. REASSIGN is worth fixing
since for most non-table object types, it won't take any lock.)
Back-patch to all supported branches. Unfortunately, in the back
branches this helps to only a limited extent, since the sinval message
queue bloats quite a lot in this usage before commit 3aafc030a,
consuming memory more or less comparable to what's actually leaked.
Still, it's clearly a leak with a simple fix, so we might as well fix it.
Justin Pryzby, per report from Guillaume Lelarge
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAECtzeW2DAoioEGBRjR=CzHP6TdL=yosGku8qZxfX9hhtrBB0Q@mail.gmail.com
In commit ff9f111bce I mixed up inconsistent definitions of the LSN of
the first record in a page, when the previous record ends exactly at the
page boundary. The correct LSN is adjusted to skip the WAL page header;
I failed to use that when setting XLogReaderState->overwrittenRecPtr,
so at WAL replay time VerifyOverwriteContrecord would refuse to let
replay continue past that record.
Backpatch to 10. 9.6 also contains this bug, but it's no longer being
maintained.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/45597.1637694259@sss.pgh.pa.us
Replica identities that depend directly on an index rely on a set of
properties, one of them being that all the columns defined in this index
have to be marked as NOT NULL. There was a hole in the logic with ALTER
TABLE DROP NOT NULL, where it was possible to remove the NOT NULL
property of a column part of an index used as replica identity, so block
it to avoid problems with logical decoding down the road.
The same check was already done columns part of a primary key, so the
fix is straight-forward.
Author: Haiying Tang, Hou Zhijie
Reviewed-by: Dilip Kumar, Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/OS0PR01MB6113338C102BEE8B2FFC5BD9FB619@OS0PR01MB6113.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Backpatch-through: 10
While determining xid horizons, we skip over backends that are running
Vacuum. We also ignore Create Index Concurrently, or Reindex Concurrently
for the purposes of computing Xmin for Vacuum. But we were not setting the
flags corresponding to these operations when they are performed in
parallel which was preventing Xid horizon from advancing.
The optimization related to skipping Create Index Concurrently, or Reindex
Concurrently operations was implemented in PG-14 but the fix is the same
for the Parallel Vacuum as well so back-patched till PG-13.
Author: Masahiko Sawada
Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila
Backpatch-through: 13
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAD21AoCLQqgM1sXh9BrDFq0uzd3RBFKi=Vfo6cjjKODm0Onr5w@mail.gmail.com
When changing REPLICA IDENTITY INDEX to another one, the target table's
relcache was not being invalidated. This leads to skipping update/delete
operations during apply on the subscriber side as the columns required to
search corresponding rows won't get logged.
Author: Tang Haiying, Hou Zhijie
Reviewed-by: Euler Taveira, Amit Kapila
Backpatch-through: 10
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/OS0PR01MB61133CA11630DAE45BC6AD95FB939@OS0PR01MB6113.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
pg_stat_get_slru() in pgstatfuncs.c would point to one element after the
end of the array PgStat_SLRUStats when finishing to scan its entries.
This had no direct consequences as no data from the extra memory area
was read, but static analyzers would rightfully complain here. So let's
be clean.
While on it, this adds one regression test in the area reserved for
system views.
Reported-by: Alexander Kozhemyakin, via AddressSanitizer
Author: Kyotaro Horiguchi
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17280-37da556e86032070@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 13
Buildfarm members kittiwake and tadarida have witnessed errors at this
site. The site discarded key facts. Back-patch to v10 (all supported
versions).
Reviewed by Michael Paquier and Tom Lane.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20211107013157.GB790288@rfd.leadboat.com
protocol.sgml documented the layout for Type messages, but completely
dropped the ball otherwise, failing to explain what they are, when
they are sent, or what they're good for. While at it, do a little
copy-editing on the description of Relation messages.
In passing, adjust the comment for apply_handle_type() to make it
clearer that we choose not to do anything when receiving a Type
message, not that we think it has no use whatsoever.
Per question from Stefen Hillman.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPgW8pMknK5pup6=T4a_UG=Cz80Rgp=KONqJmTdHfaZb0RvnFg@mail.gmail.com
The server collects up to a bufferload of data whenever it reads data
from the client socket. When SSL or GSS encryption is requested
during startup, any additional data received with the initial
request message remained in the buffer, and would be treated as
already-decrypted data once the encryption handshake completed.
Thus, a man-in-the-middle with the ability to inject data into the
TCP connection could stuff some cleartext data into the start of
a supposedly encryption-protected database session.
This could be abused to send faked SQL commands to the server,
although that would only work if the server did not demand any
authentication data. (However, a server relying on SSL certificate
authentication might well not do so.)
To fix, throw a protocol-violation error if the internal buffer
is not empty after the encryption handshake.
Our thanks to Jacob Champion for reporting this problem.
Security: CVE-2021-23214
Currently, lastOverflowedXid is never reset. It's just adjusted on new
transactions known to be overflowed. But if there are no overflowed
transactions for a long time, snapshots could be mistakenly marked as
suboverflowed due to wraparound.
This commit fixes this issue by resetting lastOverflowedXid when needed
altogether with KnownAssignedXids.
Backpatch to all supported versions.
Reported-by: Stan Hu
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMBWrQ%3DFp5UAsU_nATY7EMY7NHczG4-DTDU%3DmCvBQZAQ6wa2xQ%40mail.gmail.com
Author: Kyotaro Horiguchi, Alexander Korotkov
Reviewed-by: Stan Hu, Simon Riggs, Nikolay Samokhvalov, Andrey Borodin, Dmitry Dolgov
When a role being dropped contains is referenced by catalog objects that
are concurrently also being dropped, a crash can result while trying to
construct the string that describes the objects. Suppress that by
ignoring objects whose descriptions are returned as NULL.
The majority of relevant codesites were already cautious about this
already; we had just missed a couple.
This is an old bug, so backpatch all the way back.
Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17126-21887f04508cb5c8@postgresql.org
If lo_export() fails to open the target file or to write to it, it leaks
the created LargeObjectDesc and its snapshot in the top-transaction
context and resource owner. That's pretty harmless, it's a small leak
after all, but it gives the user a "Snapshot reference leak" warning.
Fix by using a short-lived memory context and no resource owner for
transient LargeObjectDescs that are opened and closed within one function
call. The leak is easiest to reproduce with lo_export() on a directory
that doesn't exist, but in principle the other lo_* functions could also
fail.
Backpatch to all supported versions.
Reported-by: Andrew B
Reviewed-by: Alvaro Herrera
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/32bf767a-2d65-71c4-f170-122f416bab7e@iki.fi
This undoes a mistake in 1ec7679f1: domainval and domainnull were
meant to live across loop iterations, but they were incorrectly
moved inside the loop. The effect was only to emit useless extra
EEOP_MAKE_READONLY steps, so it's not a big deal; nonetheless,
back-patch to v13 where the mistake was introduced.
Ranier Vilela
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEudQAqXuhbkaAp-sGH6dR6Nsq7v28_0TPexHOm6FiDYqwQD-w@mail.gmail.com
As in commits 6301c3ada and e9d9ba2a4, avoid doing repetitive
list_delete_first() operations, since that would be expensive when
there are many files waiting to be unlinked. This is a slightly
larger change than in those cases. We have to keep the list state
valid for calls to AbsorbSyncRequests(), so it's necessary to invent a
"canceled" field instead of immediately deleting PendingUnlinkEntry
entries. Also, because we might not be able to process all the
entries, we need a new list primitive list_delete_first_n().
list_delete_first_n() is almost list_copy_tail(), but it modifies the
input List instead of making a new copy. I found a couple of existing
uses of the latter that could profitably use the new function. (There
might be more, but the other callers look like they probably shouldn't
overwrite the input List.)
As before, back-patch to v13.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CD2F0E7F-9822-45EC-A411-AE56F14DEA9F@amazon.com
In the same spirit as 6301c3ada, fix some more places where we were
using list_delete_first() in a loop and thereby risking O(N^2)
behavior. It's not clear that the lists manipulated in these spots
can get long enough to be really problematic ... but it's not clear
that they can't, either, and the fixes are simple enough.
As before, back-patch to v13.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CD2F0E7F-9822-45EC-A411-AE56F14DEA9F@amazon.com
Failing to do so results in inability of logical decoding to process the
WAL stream. Handle it by doing nothing.
Backpatch all the way back.
Reported-by: Petr Jelínek <petr.jelinek@enterprisedb.com>
The opclass parameter Datums from the old index are fetched in the same
way as for predicates and expressions, by grabbing them directly from
the system catalogs. They are then copied into the new IndexInfo that
will be used for the creation of the new copy.
This caused the new index to be rebuilt with default parameters rather
than the ones pre-defined by a user. The only way to get back a new
index with correct opclass parameters would be to recreate a new index
from scratch.
The issue has been introduced by 911e702.
Author: Michael Paquier
Reviewed-by: Zhihong Yu
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/YX0CG/QpLXcPr8HJ@paquier.xyz
Backpatch-through: 13
When replaying a transaction that held many exclusive locks on the
primary, a standby server's startup process would expend O(N^2)
effort on manipulating the list of locks. This code was fine when
written, but commit 1cff1b95a made repetitive list_delete_first()
calls inefficient, as explained in its commit message. Fix by just
iterating the list normally, and releasing storage only when done.
(This'd be inadequate if we needed to recover from an error occurring
partway through; but we don't.)
Back-patch to v13 where 1cff1b95a came in.
Nathan Bossart
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CD2F0E7F-9822-45EC-A411-AE56F14DEA9F@amazon.com
The purpose of commit 8a54e12a38 was to
fix this, and it sufficed when the PREPARE TRANSACTION completed before
the CIC looked for lock conflicts. Otherwise, things still broke. As
before, in a cluster having used CIC while having enabled prepared
transactions, queries that use the resulting index can silently fail to
find rows. It may be necessary to reindex to recover from past
occurrences; REINDEX CONCURRENTLY suffices. Fix this for future index
builds by making CIC wait for arbitrarily-recent prepared transactions
and for ordinary transactions that may yet PREPARE TRANSACTION. As part
of that, have PREPARE TRANSACTION transfer locks to its dummy PGPROC
before it calls ProcArrayClearTransaction(). Back-patch to 9.6 (all
supported versions).
Andrey Borodin, reviewed (in earlier versions) by Andres Freund.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/01824242-AA92-4FE9-9BA7-AEBAFFEA3D0C@yandex-team.ru
CIC and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY assume backends see their catalog changes
no later than each backend's next transaction start. That failed to
hold when a backend absorbed a relevant invalidation in the middle of
running RelationBuildDesc() on the CIC index. Queries that use the
resulting index can silently fail to find rows. Fix this for future
index builds by making RelationBuildDesc() loop until it finishes
without accepting a relevant invalidation. It may be necessary to
reindex to recover from past occurrences; REINDEX CONCURRENTLY suffices.
Back-patch to 9.6 (all supported versions).
Noah Misch and Andrey Borodin, reviewed (in earlier versions) by Andres
Freund.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20210730022548.GA1940096@gust.leadboat.com
Commit 1b5d797cd4 intended to relax the lock level used to rename
indexes, but inadvertently allowed *any* relation to be renamed with a
lowered lock level, as long as the command is spelled ALTER INDEX.
That's undesirable for other relation types, so retry the operation with
the higher lock if the relation turns out not to be an index.
After this fix, ALTER INDEX <sometable> RENAME will require access
exclusive lock, which it didn't before.
Author: Nathan Bossart <bossartn@amazon.com>
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Reported-by: Onder Kalaci <onderk@microsoft.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/PH0PR21MB1328189E2821CDEC646F8178D8AE9@PH0PR21MB1328.namprd21.prod.outlook.com
An update such as "UPDATE ... SET fld[n].subfld = whatever"
failed if the array elements were domains rather than plain
composites. That's because isAssignmentIndirectionExpr()
failed to cope with the CoerceToDomain node that would appear
in the expression tree in this case. The result would typically
be a crash, and even if we accidentally didn't crash, we'd not
correctly preserve other fields of the same array element.
Per report from Onder Kalaci. Back-patch to v11 where arrays of
domains came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/PH0PR21MB132823A46AA36F0685B7A29AD8BD9@PH0PR21MB1328.namprd21.prod.outlook.com
I think when I added this assertion (in commit 8f889b108), I was only
thinking of the use of transformExpressionList at top level of INSERT
and VALUES. But it's also called by transformRowExpr(), which can
certainly occur in an UPDATE targetlist, so it's inappropriate to
suppose that p_multiassign_exprs must be empty. Besides, since the
input is not expected to contain ResTargets, there's no reason it
should contain MultiAssignRefs either. Hence this code need not
be concerned about the state of p_multiassign_exprs, and we should
just drop the assertion.
Per bug #17236 from ocean_li_996. It's been wrong for years,
so back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17236-3210de9bcba1d7ca@postgresql.org
The grammar of this command run on indexes with column names has always
been authorized by the parser, and it has never been documented.
Since 911e702, it is possible to define opclass parameters as of CREATE
INDEX, which actually broke the old case of ALTER INDEX/TABLE where
relation-level parameters n_distinct and n_distinct_inherited could be
defined for an index (see 76a47c0 and its thread where this point has
been touched, still remained unused). Attempting to do that in v13~
would cause the index to become unusable, as there is a new dedicated
code path to load opclass parameters instead of the relation-level ones
previously available. Note that it is possible to fix things with a
manual catalog update to bring the relation back online.
This commit disables this command for now as the use of column names for
indexes does not make sense anyway, particularly when it comes to index
expressions where names are automatically computed. One way to properly
support this case properly in the future would be to use column numbers
when it comes to indexes, in the same way as ALTER INDEX .. ALTER COLUMN
.. SET STATISTICS.
Partitioned indexes were already blocked, but not indexes. Some tests
are added for both cases.
There was some code in ANALYZE to enforce n_distinct to be used for an
index expression if the parameter was defined, but just remove it for
now until/if there is support for this (note that index-level parameters
never had support in pg_dump either, previously), so this was just dead
code.
Reported-by: Matthijs van der Vleuten
Author: Nathan Bossart, Michael Paquier
Reviewed-by: Vik Fearing, Dilip Kumar
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17220-15d684c6c2171a83@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 13
Failing to do that, any direct inserts/updates of those partitions
would fail to enforce the correct constraint, that is, one that
considers the new partition constraint of their parent table.
Backpatch to 10.
Reported by: Hou Zhijie <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>
Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Reviewed-by: Nitin Jadhav <nitinjadhavpostgres@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/OS3PR01MB5718DA1C4609A25186D1FBF194089%40OS3PR01MB5718.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
