Commit graph

12 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Andres Freund
ce38949ba2 Improve expression evaluation test coverage.
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
2017-03-11 15:41:34 -08:00
Tom Lane
cd1b215692 Fix handling of expanded objects in CoerceToDomain and CASE execution.
When the input value to a CoerceToDomain expression node is a read-write
expanded datum, we should pass a read-only pointer to any domain CHECK
expressions and then return the original read-write pointer as the
expression result.  Previously we were blindly passing the same pointer to
all the consumers of the value, making it possible for a function in CHECK
to modify or even delete the expanded value.  (Since a plpgsql function
will absorb a passed-in read-write expanded array as a local variable
value, it will in fact delete the value on exit.)

A similar hazard of passing the same read-write pointer to multiple
consumers exists in domain_check() and in ExecEvalCase, so fix those too.

The fix requires adding MakeExpandedObjectReadOnly calls at the appropriate
places, which is simple enough except that we need to get the data type's
typlen from somewhere.  For the domain cases, solve this by redefining
DomainConstraintRef.tcache as okay for callers to access; there wasn't any
reason for the original convention against that, other than not wanting the
API of typcache.c to be any wider than it had to be.  For CASE, there's
no good solution except to add a syscache lookup during executor start.

Per bug #14472 from Marcos Castedo.  Back-patch to 9.5 where expanded
values were introduced.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15225.1482431619@sss.pgh.pa.us
2016-12-22 15:01:37 -05:00
Tom Lane
2533ff0aa5 Fix instability in parallel regression tests.
Commit f0c7b789a added a test case in case.sql that creates and then drops
both an '=' operator and the type it's for.  Given the right timing, that
can cause a "cache lookup failed for type" failure in concurrent sessions,
which see the '=' operator as a potential match for '=' in a query, but
then the type is gone by the time they inquire into its properties.
It might be nice to make that behavior more robust someday, but as a
back-patchable solution, adjust the new test case so that the operator
is never visible to other sessions.  Like the previous commit, back-patch
to all supported branches.

Discussion: <5983.1471371667@sss.pgh.pa.us>
2016-08-25 09:57:09 -04:00
Tom Lane
f0c7b789ab Fix two errors with nested CASE/WHEN constructs.
ExecEvalCase() tried to save a cycle or two by passing
&econtext->caseValue_isNull as the isNull argument to its sub-evaluation of
the CASE value expression.  If that subexpression itself contained a CASE,
then *isNull was an alias for econtext->caseValue_isNull within the
recursive call of ExecEvalCase(), leading to confusion about whether the
inner call's caseValue was null or not.  In the worst case this could lead
to a core dump due to dereferencing a null pointer.  Fix by not assigning
to the global variable until control comes back from the subexpression.
Also, avoid using the passed-in isNull pointer transiently for evaluation
of WHEN expressions.  (Either one of these changes would have been
sufficient to fix the known misbehavior, but it's clear now that each of
these choices was in itself dangerous coding practice and best avoided.
There do not seem to be any similar hazards elsewhere in execQual.c.)

Also, it was possible for inlining of a SQL function that implements the
equality operator used for a CASE comparison to result in one CASE
expression's CaseTestExpr node being inserted inside another CASE
expression.  This would certainly result in wrong answers since the
improperly nested CaseTestExpr would be caused to return the inner CASE's
comparison value not the outer's.  If the CASE values were of different
data types, a crash might result; moreover such situations could be abused
to allow disclosure of portions of server memory.  To fix, teach
inline_function to check for "bare" CaseTestExpr nodes in the arguments of
a function to be inlined, and avoid inlining if there are any.

Heikki Linnakangas, Michael Paquier, Tom Lane

Report: https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/pull/327
Report: <4DDCEEB8.50602@enterprisedb.com>
Security: CVE-2016-5423
2016-08-08 10:33:46 -04:00
Peter Eisentraut
cc26ea9fe2 Clean up references to SQL92
In most cases, these were just references to the SQL standard in
general.  In a few cases, a contrast was made between SQL92 and later
standards -- those have been kept unchanged.
2013-04-20 11:04:41 -04:00
Peter Eisentraut
3f11971916 Remove extra newlines at end and beginning of files, add missing newlines
at end of files.
2010-08-19 05:57:36 +00:00
Tom Lane
fffb5819ca Adjust constant-folding of CASE expressions so that the simple comparison
form of CASE (eg, CASE 0 WHEN 1 THEN ...) can be constant-folded as it
was in 7.4.  Also, avoid constant-folding result expressions that are
certainly unreachable --- the former coding was a bit cavalier about this
and could generate unexpected results for all-constant CASE expressions.
Add regression test cases.  Per report from Vlad Marchenko.
2005-02-02 21:49:09 +00:00
Neil Conway
48e2bb13c9 This trivial patch adds a regression test for CASE expressions that use
an untyped literal in the CASE's test expression. This adds test
coverage for a bug that was fixed by Tom on January 12.
2005-01-17 03:39:37 +00:00
Thomas G. Lockhart
d1e6368816 Clean up header for uniform appearance throughout tests. 2000-01-06 06:41:55 +00:00
Tom Lane
86bc1da262 Update regress test for CASE to enable tests involving joins. 1999-05-06 23:09:30 +00:00
Thomas G. Lockhart
4335a3779b Add many new test cases. 1999-02-23 07:30:05 +00:00
Thomas G. Lockhart
47e506fb8f Include test for CASE expression. 1998-12-04 15:36:51 +00:00