aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/backend
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAge
...
* Translation updatesPeter Eisentraut2019-06-17
| | | | | Source-Git-URL: https://git.postgresql.org/git/pgtranslation/messages.git Source-Git-Hash: 599a4bccd28710a88972e1a0ef6961c9bad816fc
* Fix buffer overflow when parsing SCRAM verifiers in backendMichael Paquier2019-06-17
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Any authenticated user can overflow a stack-based buffer by changing the user's own password to a purpose-crafted value. This often suffices to execute arbitrary code as the PostgreSQL operating system account. This fix is contributed by multiple folks, based on an initial analysis from Tom Lane. This issue has been introduced by 68e61ee, so it was possible to make use of it at authentication time. It became more easily to trigger after ccae190 which has made the SCRAM parsing more strict when changing a password, in the case where the client passes down a verifier already hashed using SCRAM. Back-patch to v10 where SCRAM has been introduced. Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin Author: Jonathan Katz, Heikki Linnakangas, Michael Paquier Security: CVE-2019-10164 Backpatch-through: 10
* Revert "Avoid spurious deadlocks when upgrading a tuple lock"Alvaro Herrera2019-06-16
| | | | | | | | | | | This reverts commits 3da73d6839dc and de87a084c0a5. This code has some tricky corner cases that I'm not sure are correct and not properly tested anyway, so I'm reverting the whole thing for next week's releases (reintroducing the deadlock bug that we set to fix). I'll try again afterwards. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1hbXKQ-0003g1-0C@gemulon.postgresql.org
* Silence compiler warningAlvaro Herrera2019-06-14
| | | | Introduced in de87a084c0a5.
* Avoid spurious deadlocks when upgrading a tuple lockAlvaro Herrera2019-06-13
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | When two (or more) transactions are waiting for transaction T1 to release a tuple-level lock, and transaction T1 upgrades its lock to a higher level, a spurious deadlock can be reported among the waiting transactions when T1 finishes. The simplest example case seems to be: T1: select id from job where name = 'a' for key share; Y: select id from job where name = 'a' for update; -- starts waiting for X Z: select id from job where name = 'a' for key share; T1: update job set name = 'b' where id = 1; Z: update job set name = 'c' where id = 1; -- starts waiting for X T1: rollback; At this point, transaction Y is rolled back on account of a deadlock: Y holds the heavyweight tuple lock and is waiting for the Xmax to be released, while Z holds part of the multixact and tries to acquire the heavyweight lock (per protocol) and goes to sleep; once X releases its part of the multixact, Z is awakened only to be put back to sleep on the heavyweight lock that Y is holding while sleeping. Kaboom. This can be avoided by having Z skip the heavyweight lock acquisition. As far as I can see, the biggest downside is that if there are multiple Z transactions, the order in which they resume after X finishes is not guaranteed. Backpatch to 9.6. The patch applies cleanly on 9.5, but the new tests don't work there (because isolationtester is not smart enough), so I'm not going to risk it. Author: Oleksii Kliukin Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/B9C9D7CD-EB94-4635-91B6-E558ACEC0EC3@hintbits.com
* Fix incorrect printing of queries with duplicated join names.Tom Lane2019-06-12
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Given a query in which multiple JOIN nodes used the same alias (which'd necessarily be in different sub-SELECTs), ruleutils.c would assign the JOIN nodes distinct aliases for clarity ... but then it forgot to print the modified aliases when dumping the JOIN nodes themselves. This results in a dump/reload hazard for views, because the emitted query is flat-out incorrect: Vars will be printed with table names that have no referent. This has been wrong for a long time, so back-patch to all supported branches. Philip Dubé Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CY4PR2101MB080246F2955FF58A6ED1FEAC98140@CY4PR2101MB0802.namprd21.prod.outlook.com
* In walreceiver, don't try to do ereport() in a signal handler.Tom Lane2019-06-12
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This is quite unsafe, even for the case of ereport(FATAL) where we won't return control to the interrupted code, and despite this code's use of a flag to restrict the areas where we'd try to do it. It's possible for example that we interrupt malloc or free while that's holding a lock that's meant to protect against cross-thread interference. Then, any attempt to do malloc or free within ereport() will result in a deadlock, preventing the walreceiver process from exiting in response to SIGTERM. We hypothesize that this explains some hard-to-reproduce failures seen in the buildfarm. Hence, get rid of the immediate-exit code in WalRcvShutdownHandler, as well as the logic associated with WalRcvImmediateInterruptOK. Instead, we need to take care that potentially-blocking operations in the walreceiver's data transmission logic (libpqwalreceiver.c) will respond reasonably promptly to the process's latch becoming set and then call ProcessWalRcvInterrupts. Much of the needed code for that was already present in libpqwalreceiver.c. I refactored things a bit so that all the uses of PQgetResult use latch-aware waiting, but didn't need to do much more. These changes should be enough to ensure that libpqwalreceiver.c will respond promptly to SIGTERM whenever it's waiting to receive data. In principle, it could block for a long time while waiting to send data too, and this patch does nothing to guard against that. I think that that hazard is mostly theoretical though: such blocking should occur only if we fill the kernel's data transmission buffers, and we don't generally send enough data to make that happen without waiting for input. If we find out that the hazard isn't just theoretical, we could fix it by using PQsetnonblocking, but that would require more ticklish changes than I care to make now. Back-patch of commit a1a789eb5. This problem goes all the way back to the origins of walreceiver; but given the substantial reworking the module received during the v10 cycle, it seems unsafe to assume that our testing on HEAD validates this patch for pre-v10 branches. And we'd need to back-patch some prerequisite patches (at least 597a87ccc and its followups, maybe other things), increasing the risk of problems. Given the dearth of field reports matching this problem, it's not worth much risk. Hence back-patch to v10 and v11 only. Patch by me; thanks to Thomas Munro for review. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190416070119.GK2673@paquier.xyz
* Fix ALTER COLUMN TYPE failure with a partial exclusion constraint.Tom Lane2019-06-12
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ATExecAlterColumnType failed to consider the possibility that an index that needs to be rebuilt might be a child of a constraint that needs to be rebuilt. We missed this so far because usually a constraint index doesn't have a direct dependency on its table, just on the constraint object. But if there's a WHERE clause, then dependency analysis of the WHERE clause results in direct dependencies on the column(s) mentioned in WHERE. This led to trying to drop and rebuild both the constraint and its underlying index. In v11/HEAD, we successfully drop both the index and the constraint, and then try to rebuild both, and of course the second rebuild hits a duplicate-index-name problem. Before v11, it fails with obscure messages about a missing relation OID, due to trying to drop the index twice. This is essentially the same kind of problem noted in commit 20bef2c31: the possible dependency linkages are broader than what ATExecAlterColumnType was designed for. It was probably OK when written, but it's certainly been broken since the introduction of partial exclusion constraints. Fix by adding an explicit check for whether any of the indexes-to-be-rebuilt belong to any of the constraints-to-be-rebuilt, and ignoring any that do. In passing, fix a latent bug introduced by commit 8b08f7d48: in get_constraint_index() we must "continue" not "break" when rejecting a relation of a wrong relkind. This is harmless today because we don't expect that code path to be taken anyway; but if there ever were any relations to be ignored, the existing coding would have an extremely undesirable dependency on the order of pg_depend entries. Also adjust a couple of obsolete comments. Per bug #15835 from Yaroslav Schekin. Back-patch to all supported branches. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15835-32d9b7a76c06a7a9@postgresql.org
* Fix handling of COMMENT for domain constraintsMichael Paquier2019-06-12
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | For a non-superuser, changing a comment on a domain constraint was leading to a cache lookup failure as the code tried to perform the ownership lookup on the constraint OID itself, thinking that it was a type, but this check needs to happen on the type the domain constraint relies on. As the type a domain constraint relies on can be guessed directly based on the constraint OID, first fetch its type OID and perform the ownership on it. This is broken since 7eca575, which has split the handling of comments for table constraints and domain constraints, so back-patch down to 9.5. Reported-by: Clemens Ladisch Author: Daniel Gustafsson, Michael Paquier Reviewed-by: Álvaro Herrera Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15833-808e11904835d26f@postgresql.org Backpatch-through: 9.5
* Fix conversion of JSON strings to JSON output columns in json_to_record().Tom Lane2019-06-11
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | json_to_record(), when an output column is declared as type json or jsonb, should emit the corresponding field of the input JSON object. But it got this slightly wrong when the field is just a string literal: it failed to escape the contents of the string. That typically resulted in syntax errors if the string contained any double quotes or backslashes. jsonb_to_record() handles such cases correctly, but I added corresponding test cases for it too, to prevent future backsliding. Improve the documentation, as it provided only a very hand-wavy description of the conversion rules used by these functions. Per bug report from Robert Vollmert. Back-patch to v10 where the error was introduced (by commit cf35346e8). Note that PG 9.4 - 9.6 also get this case wrong, but differently so: they feed the de-escaped contents of the string literal to json[b]_in. That behavior is less obviously wrong, so possibly it's being depended on in the field, so I won't risk trying to make the older branches behave like the newer ones. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/D6921B37-BD8E-4664-8D5F-DB3525765DCD@vllmrt.net
* Don't access catalogs to validate GUCs when not connected to a DB.Andres Freund2019-06-10
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Vignesh found this bug in the check function for default_table_access_method's check hook, but that was just copied from older GUCs. Investigation by Michael and me then found the bug in further places. When not connected to a database (e.g. in a walsender connection), we cannot perform (most) GUC checks that need database access. Even when only shared tables are needed, unless they're nailed (c.f. RelationCacheInitializePhase2()), they cannot be accessed without pg_class etc. being present. Fix by extending the existing IsTransactionState() checks to also check for MyDatabaseOid. Reported-By: Vignesh C, Michael Paquier, Andres Freund Author: Vignesh C, Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CALDaNm1KXK9gbZfY-p_peRFm_XrBh1OwQO1Kk6Gig0c0fVZ2uw%40mail.gmail.com Backpatch: 9.4-
* Fix inconsistency in comments atop ExecParallelEstimate.Amit Kapila2019-06-07
| | | | | | | | | | | | | When this code was initially introduced in commit d1b7c1ff, the structure used was SharedPlanStateInstrumentation, but later when it got changed to Instrumentation structure in commit b287df70, we forgot to update the comment. Reported-by: Wu Fei Author: Wu Fei Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila Backpatch-through: 9.6 Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/52E6E0843B9D774C8C73D6CF64402F0562215EB2@G08CNEXMBPEKD02.g08.fujitsu.local
* Fix unsafe memory management in CloneRowTriggersToPartition().Tom Lane2019-06-03
| | | | | | | | | | | | | It's not really supported to call systable_getnext() in a different memory context than systable_beginscan() was called in, and it's *definitely* not safe to do so and then reset that context between calls. I'm not very clear on how this code survived CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS testing ... but Alexander Lakhin found a case that would crash it pretty reliably. Per bug #15828. Fix, and backpatch to v11 where this code came in. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15828-f6ddd7df4852f473@postgresql.org
* Make error logging in extended statistics more consistentTomas Vondra2019-05-30
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Most errors reported in extended statistics are internal issues, and so should use elog(). The MCV list code was already following this rule, but the functional dependencies and ndistinct coefficients were using a mix of elog() and ereport(). Fix this by changing most places to elog(), with the exception of input functions. This is a mostly cosmetic change, it makes the life a little bit easier for translators, as elog() messages are not translated. So backpatch to PostgreSQL 10, where extended statistics were introduced. Author: Tomas Vondra Backpatch-through: 10 where extended statistics were added Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190503154404.GA7478@alvherre.pgsql
* Fix array size allocation for HashAggregate hash keys.Andrew Gierth2019-05-23
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | When there were duplicate columns in the hash key list, the array sizes could be miscomputed, resulting in access off the end of the array. Adjust the computation to ensure the array is always large enough. (I considered whether the duplicates could be removed in planning, but I can't rule out the possibility that duplicate columns might have different hash functions assigned. Simpler to just make sure it works at execution time regardless.) Bug apparently introduced in fc4b3dea2 as part of narrowing down the tuples stored in the hashtable. Reported by Colm McHugh of Salesforce, though I didn't use their patch. Backpatch back to version 10 where the bug was introduced. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFeeJoKKu0u+A_A9R9316djW-YW3-+Gtgvy3ju655qRHR3jtdA@mail.gmail.com
* Minimally fix partial aggregation for aggregates that don't have one argument.Andres Freund2019-05-19
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | For partial aggregation combine steps, AggStatePerTrans->numTransInputs was set to the transition function's number of inputs, rather than the combine function's number of inputs (always 1). That lead to partial aggregates with strict combine functions to wrongly check for NOT NULL input as required by strictness. When the aggregate wasn't exactly passed one argument, the strictness check was either omitted (in the 0 args case) or too many arguments were checked. In the latter case we'd read beyond the end of FunctionCallInfoData->args (only in master). AggStatePerTrans->numTransInputs actually has been wrong since since 9.6, where partial aggregates were added. But it turns out to not be an active problem in 9.6 and 10, because numTransInputs wasn't used at all for combine functions: Before c253b722f6 there simply was no NULL check for the input to strict trans functions, and after that the check was simply hardcoded for the right offset in fcinfo, as it's done by code specific to combine functions. In bf6c614a2f2 (11) the strictness check was generalized, with common code doing the strictness checks for both plain and combine transition functions, based on numTransInputs. For combine functions this lead to not emitting an expression step to check for strict input in the 0 arguments case, and in the > 1 arguments case, we'd check too many arguments.Due to the fact that the relevant fcinfo->isnull[2..] was always zero-initialized (more or less by accident, by being part of the AggStatePerTrans struct, which is palloc0'ed), there was no observable damage in the latter case before a9c35cf85ca1f, we just checked too many array elements. Due to the changes in a9c35cf85ca1f, > 1 argument bug became visible, because these days fcinfo is a) dynamically allocated without being zeroed b) exactly the length required for the number of specified arguments (hardcoded to 2 in this case). This commit only contains a fairly minimal fix, setting numTransInputs to a hardcoded 1 when building a pertrans for a combine function. It seems likely that we'll want to clean this up further (e.g. the arguments build_pertrans_for_aggref() aren't particularly meaningful for combine functions). But the wrap date for 12 beta1 is coming up fast, so it seems good to have a minimal fix in place. Backpatch to 11. While AggStatePerTrans->numTransInputs was set wrongly before that, the value was not used for combine functions. Reported-By: Rajkumar Raghuwanshi Diagnosed-By: Kyotaro Horiguchi, Jeevan Chalke, Andres Freund, David Rowley Author: David Rowley, Kyotaro Horiguchi, Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKcux6=uZEyWyLw0N7HtR9OBc-sWEFeByEZC7t-KDf15FKxVew@mail.gmail.com
* Restructure creation of run-time pruning steps.Tom Lane2019-05-17
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Previously, gen_partprune_steps() always built executor pruning steps using all suitable clauses, including those containing PARAM_EXEC Params. This meant that the pruning steps were only completely safe for executor run-time (scan start) pruning. To prune at executor startup, we had to ignore the steps involving exec Params. But this doesn't really work in general, since there may be logic changes needed as well --- for example, pruning according to the last operator's btree strategy is the wrong thing if we're not applying that operator. The rules embodied in gen_partprune_steps() and its minions are sufficiently complicated that tracking their incremental effects in other logic seems quite impractical. Short of a complete redesign, the only safe fix seems to be to run gen_partprune_steps() twice, once to create executor startup pruning steps and then again for run-time pruning steps. We can save a few cycles however by noting during the first scan whether we rejected any clauses because they involved exec Params --- if not, we don't need to do the second scan. In support of this, refactor the internal APIs in partprune.c to make more use of passing information in the GeneratePruningStepsContext struct, rather than as separate arguments. This is, I hope, the last piece of our response to a bug report from Alan Jackson. Back-patch to v11 where this code came in. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/FAD28A83-AC73-489E-A058-2681FA31D648@tvsquared.com
* Fix bogus logic for combining range-partitioned columns during pruning.Tom Lane2019-05-16
| | | | | | | | | | | | gen_prune_steps_from_opexps's notion of how to do this was overly complicated and underly correct. Per discussion of a report from Alan Jackson (though this fixes only one aspect of that problem). Back-patch to v11 where this code came in. Amit Langote Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/FAD28A83-AC73-489E-A058-2681FA31D648@tvsquared.com
* Fix partition pruning to treat stable comparison operators properly.Tom Lane2019-05-16
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Cross-type comparison operators in a btree or hash opclass might be only stable not immutable (this is true of timestamp vs. timestamptz for example). partprune.c ignored this possibility and would perform plan-time pruning with them anyway, possibly leading to wrong answers if the environment changed between planning and execution. To fix, teach gen_partprune_steps() to do things differently when creating plan-time pruning steps vs. run-time pruning steps. analyze_partkey_exprs() also needs an extra check, which is rather annoying but now is not the time to restructure things enough to avoid that. While at it, simplify the logic for the plan-time case a little by insisting that the comparison value be a Const and nothing else. This relies on the assumption that eval_const_expressions will have reduced any immutable expression to a Const; which is not quite 100% true, but certainly any case that comes up often enough to be interesting should have simplification logic there. Also improve a bunch of inadequate/obsolete/wrong comments. Per discussion of a report from Alan Jackson (though this fixes only one aspect of that problem). Back-patch to v11 where this code came in. David Rowley, with some further hacking by me Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/FAD28A83-AC73-489E-A058-2681FA31D648@tvsquared.com
* Fix comment on when HOT update is possible.Heikki Linnakangas2019-05-14
| | | | | | | | The conditions listed in this comment have changed several times, and at some point the thing that the "if so" referred to was negated. The text was OK up to 9.6. It was differently wrong in v10, v11 and master, so fix in all those versions.
* Fix logical replication's ideas about which type OIDs are built-in.Tom Lane2019-05-13
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Only hand-assigned type OIDs should be presumed to match across different PG servers; those assigned during genbki.pl or during initdb are likely to change due to addition or removal of unrelated objects. This means that the cutoff should be FirstGenbkiObjectId (in HEAD) or FirstBootstrapObjectId (before that), not FirstNormalObjectId. Compare postgres_fdw's is_builtin() test. It's likely that this error has no observable consequence in a normally-functioning system, since ATM the only affected type OIDs are system catalog rowtypes and information_schema types, which would not typically be interesting for logical replication. But you could probably break it if you tried hard, so back-patch. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15150.1557257111@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Don't leave behind junk nbtree pages during split.Peter Geoghegan2019-05-13
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Commit 8fa30f906be reduced the elevel of a number of "can't happen" _bt_split() errors from PANIC to ERROR. At the same time, the new right page buffer for the split could continue to be acquired well before the critical section. This was possible because it was relatively straightforward to make sure that _bt_split() could not throw an error, with a few specific exceptions. The exceptional cases were safe because they involved specific, well understood errors, making it possible to consistently zero the right page before actually raising an error using elog(). There was no danger of leaving around a junk page, provided _bt_split() stuck to this coding rule. Commit 8224de4f, which introduced INCLUDE indexes, added code to make _bt_split() truncate away non-key attributes. This happened at a point that broke the rule around zeroing the right page in _bt_split(). If truncation failed (perhaps due to palloc() failure), that would result in an errant right page buffer with junk contents. This could confuse VACUUM when it attempted to delete the page, and should be avoided on general principle. To fix, reorganize _bt_split() so that truncation occurs before the new right page buffer is even acquired. A junk page/buffer will not be left behind if _bt_nonkey_truncate()/_bt_truncate() raise an error. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-WzkcWT_-NH7EeL=Az4efg0KCV+wArygW8zKB=+HoP=VWMw@mail.gmail.com Backpatch: 11-, where INCLUDE indexes were introduced.
* Fix misoptimization of "{1,1}" quantifiers in regular expressions.Tom Lane2019-05-12
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | A bounded quantifier with m = n = 1 might be thought a no-op. But according to our documentation (which traces back to Henry Spencer's original man page) it still imposes greediness, or non-greediness in the case of the non-greedy variant "{1,1}?", on whatever it's attached to. This turns out not to work though, because parseqatom() optimizes away the m = n = 1 case without regard for whether it's supposed to change the greediness of the argument RE. We can fix this by just not applying the optimization when the greediness needs to change; the subsequent general cases handle it fine. The three cases in which we can still apply the optimization are (a) no quantifier, or quantifier does not impose a preference; (b) atom has no greediness property, implying it cannot match a variable amount of text anyway; or (c) quantifier's greediness is same as atom's. Note that in most cases where one of these applies, we'd have exited earlier in the "not a messy case" fast path. I think it's now only possible to get to the optimization when the atom involves capturing parentheses or a non-top-level backref. Back-patch to all supported branches. I'd ordinarily be hesitant to put a subtle behavioral change into back branches, but in this case it's very hard to see a reason why somebody would write "{1,1}?" unless they're trying to get the documented change-of-greediness behavior. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/5bb27a41-350d-37bf-901e-9d26f5592dd0@charter.net
* Fail pgwin32_message_to_UTF16() for SQL_ASCII messages.Noah Misch2019-05-12
| | | | | | | | | | | | The function had been interpreting SQL_ASCII messages as UTF8, throwing an error when they were invalid UTF8. The new behavior is consistent with pg_do_encoding_conversion(). This affects LOG_DESTINATION_STDERR and LOG_DESTINATION_EVENTLOG, which will send untranslated bytes to write() and ReportEventA(). On buildfarm member bowerbird, enabling log_connections caused an error whenever the role name was not valid UTF8. Back-patch to 9.4 (all supported versions). Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190512015615.GD1124997@rfd.leadboat.com
* Rearrange pgstat_bestart() to avoid failures within its critical section.Tom Lane2019-05-11
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | We long ago decided to design the shared PgBackendStatus data structure to minimize the cost of writing status updates, which means that writers just have to increment the st_changecount field twice. That isn't hooked into any sort of resource management mechanism, which means that if something were to throw error between the two increments, the st_changecount field would be left odd indefinitely. That would cause readers to lock up. Now, since it's also a bad idea to leave the field odd for longer than absolutely necessary (because readers will spin while we have it set), the expectation was that we'd treat these segments like spinlock critical sections, with only short, more or less straight-line, code in them. That was fine as originally designed, but commit 9029f4b37 broke it by inserting a significant amount of non-straight-line code into pgstat_bestart(), code that is very capable of throwing errors, not to mention taking a significant amount of time during which readers will spin. We have a report from Neeraj Kumar of readers actually locking up, which I suspect was due to an encoding conversion error in X509_NAME_to_cstring, though conceivably it was just a garden-variety OOM failure. Subsequent commits have loaded even more dubious code into pgstat_bestart's critical section (and commit fc70a4b0d deserves some kind of booby prize for managing to miss the critical section entirely, although the negative consequences seem minimal given that the PgBackendStatus entry should be seen by readers as inactive at that point). The right way to fix this mess seems to be to compute all these values into a local copy of the process' PgBackendStatus struct, and then just copy the data back within the critical section proper. This plan can't be implemented completely cleanly because of the struct's heavy reliance on out-of-line strings, which we must initialize separately within the critical section. But still, the critical section is far smaller and safer than it was before. In hopes of forestalling future errors of the same ilk, rename the macros for st_changecount management to make it more apparent that the writer-side macros create a critical section. And to prevent the worst consequences if we nonetheless manage to mess it up anyway, adjust those macros so that they really are a critical section, ie they now bump CritSectionCount. That doesn't add much overhead, and it guarantees that if we do somehow throw an error while the counter is odd, it will lead to PANIC and a database restart to reset shared memory. Back-patch to 9.5 where the problem was introduced. In HEAD, also fix an oversight in commit b0b39f72b: it failed to teach pgstat_read_current_status to copy st_gssstatus data from shared memory to local memory. Hence, subsequent use of that data within the transaction would potentially see changing data that it shouldn't see. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPR3Wj5Z17=+eeyrn_ZDG3NQGYgMEOY6JV6Y-WRRhGgwc16U3Q@mail.gmail.com
* Cope with EINVAL and EIDRM shmat() failures in PGSharedMemoryAttach.Tom Lane2019-05-10
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | There's a very old race condition in our code to see whether a pre-existing shared memory segment is still in use by a conflicting postmaster: it's possible for the other postmaster to remove the segment in between our shmctl() and shmat() calls. It's a narrow window, and there's no risk unless both postmasters are using the same port number, but that's possible during parallelized "make check" tests. (Note that while the TAP tests take some pains to choose a randomized port number, pg_regress doesn't.) If it does happen, we treated that as an unexpected case and errored out. To fix, allow EINVAL to be treated as segment-not-present, and the same for EIDRM on Linux. AFAICS, the considerations here are basically identical to the checks for acceptable shmctl() failures, so I documented and coded it that way. While at it, adjust PGSharedMemoryAttach's API to remove its undocumented dependency on UsedShmemSegAddr in favor of passing the attach address explicitly. This makes it easier to be sure we're using a null shmaddr when probing for segment conflicts (thus avoiding questions about what EINVAL means). I don't think there was a bug there, but it required fragile assumptions about the state of UsedShmemSegAddr during PGSharedMemoryIsInUse. Commit c09850992 may have made this failure more probable by applying the conflicting-segment tests more often. Hence, back-patch to all supported branches, as that was. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/22224.1557340366@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Repair issues with faulty generation of merge-append plans.Tom Lane2019-05-09
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | create_merge_append_plan failed to honor the CP_EXACT_TLIST flag: it would generate the expected targetlist but then it felt free to add resjunk sort targets to it. This demonstrably leads to assertion failures in v11 and HEAD, and it's probably just accidental that we don't see the same in older branches. I've not looked into whether there would be any real-world consequences in non-assert builds. In HEAD, create_append_plan has sprouted the same problem, so fix that too (although we do not have any test cases that seem able to reach that bug). This is an oversight in commit 3fc6e2d7f which invented the CP_EXACT_TLIST flag, so back-patch to 9.6 where that came in. convert_subquery_pathkeys would create pathkeys for subquery output values if they match any EquivalenceClass known in the outer query and are available in the subquery's syntactic targetlist. However, the second part of that condition is wrong, because such values might not appear in the subquery relation's reltarget list, which would mean that they couldn't be accessed above the level of the subquery scan. We must check that they appear in the reltarget list, instead. This can lead to dropping knowledge about the subquery's sort ordering, but I believe it's okay, because any sort key that the outer query actually has any interest in would appear in the reltarget list. This second issue is of very long standing, but right now there's no evidence that it causes observable problems before 9.6, so I refrained from back-patching further than that. We can revisit that choice if somebody finds a way to make it cause problems in older branches. (Developing useful test cases for these issues is really problematic; fixing convert_subquery_pathkeys removes the only known way to exhibit the create_merge_append_plan bug, and neither of the test cases added by this patch causes a problem in all branches, even when considering the issues separately.) The second issue explains bug #15795 from Suresh Kumar R ("could not find pathkey item to sort" with nested DISTINCT queries). I stumbled across the first issue while investigating that. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15795-fadb56c8e44ee73c@postgresql.org
* Remove leftover reference to old "flat file" mechanism in a comment.Heikki Linnakangas2019-05-08
| | | | The flat file mechanism was removed in PostgreSQL 9.0.
* Translation updatesPeter Eisentraut2019-05-06
| | | | | Source-Git-URL: https://git.postgresql.org/git/pgtranslation/messages.git Source-Git-Hash: 96d81aab04631d76c9ca90a3b12885100c061775
* Fix tuple printing in error message of tuple routing for partitionsMichael Paquier2019-05-06
| | | | | | | | | | | | With correctly crafted DDLs, this could lead to disclosure of arbitrary backend memory a user may have no right to access. This impacts only REL_11_STABLE, as the issue has been introduced by 34295b8. On HEAD, add regression tests to cover this issue in the future. Author: Michael Paquier Reviewed-by: Noah Misch Security: CVE-2019-10129
* Use checkAsUser for selectivity estimator checks, if it's set.Dean Rasheed2019-05-06
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | In examine_variable() and examine_simple_variable(), when checking the user's table and column privileges to determine whether to grant access to the pg_statistic data, use checkAsUser for the privilege checks, if it's set. This will be the case if we're accessing the table via a view, to indicate that we should perform privilege checks as the view owner rather than the current user. This change makes this planner check consistent with the check in the executor, so the planner will be able to make use of statistics if the table is accessible via the view. This fixes a performance regression introduced by commit e2d4ef8de8, which affects queries against non-security barrier views in the case where the user doesn't have privileges on the underlying table, but the view owner does. Note that it continues to provide the same safeguards controlling access to pg_statistic for direct table access (in which case checkAsUser won't be set) and for security barrier views, because of the nearby checks on rte->security_barrier and rte->securityQuals. Back-patch to all supported branches because e2d4ef8de8 was. Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Jonathan Katz and Stephen Frost.
* Fix security checks for selectivity estimation functions with RLS.Dean Rasheed2019-05-06
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | In commit e2d4ef8de8, security checks were added to prevent user-supplied operators from running over data from pg_statistic unless the user has table or column privileges on the table, or the operator is leakproof. For a table with RLS, however, checking for table or column privileges is insufficient, since that does not guarantee that the user has permission to view all of the column's data. Fix this by also checking for securityQuals on the RTE, and insisting that the operator be leakproof if there are any. Thus the leakproofness check will only be skipped if there are no securityQuals and the user has table or column privileges on the table -- i.e., only if we know that the user has access to all the data in the column. Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was added. Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Jonathan Katz and Stephen Frost. Security: CVE-2019-10130
* Fix style violations in syscache lookups.Tom Lane2019-05-05
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Project style is to check the success of SearchSysCacheN and friends by applying HeapTupleIsValid to the result. A tiny minority of calls creatively did it differently. Bring them into line with the rest. This is just cosmetic, since HeapTupleIsValid is indeed just a null check at the moment ... but that may not be true forever, and in any case it puts a mental burden on readers who may wonder why these call sites are not like the rest. Back-patch to v11 just to keep the branches in sync. (The bulk of these errors seem to have originated in v11 or v12, though a few are old.) Per searching to see if anyplace else had made the same error repaired in 62148c352.
* Add check for syscache lookup failure in update_relispartition().Tom Lane2019-05-05
| | | | | | | | Omitted in commit 05b38c7e6 (though it looks like the original blame belongs to 9e9befac4). A failure is admittedly unlikely, but if it did happen, SIGSEGV is not the approved method of reporting it. Per Coverity. Back-patch to v11 where the broken code originated.
* Fix reindexing of pg_class indexes some more.Tom Lane2019-05-02
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Commits 3dbb317d3 et al failed under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS testing. Investigation showed that to reindex pg_class_oid_index, we must suppress accesses to the index (via SetReindexProcessing) before we call RelationSetNewRelfilenode, or at least before we do CommandCounterIncrement therein; otherwise, relcache reloads happening within the CCI may try to fetch pg_class rows using the index's new relfilenode value, which is as yet an empty file. Of course, the point of 3dbb317d3 was that that ordering didn't work either, because then RelationSetNewRelfilenode's own update of the index's pg_class row cannot access the index, should it need to. There are various ways we might have got around that, but Andres Freund came up with a brilliant solution: for a mapped index, we can really just skip the pg_class update altogether. The only fields it was actually changing were relpages etc, but it was just setting them to zeroes which is useless make-work. (Correct new values will be installed at the end of index build.) All pg_class indexes are mapped and probably always will be, so this eliminates the problem by removing work rather than adding it, always a pleasant outcome. Having taught RelationSetNewRelfilenode to do it that way, we can revert the code reordering in reindex_index. (But I left the moved setup code where it was; there seems no reason why it has to run without use of the old index. If you're trying to fix a busted pg_class index, you'll have had to disable system index use altogether to get this far.) Moreover, this means we don't need RelationSetIndexList at all, because reindex_relation's hacking to make "REINDEX TABLE pg_class" work is likewise now unnecessary. We'll leave that code in place in the back branches, but a follow-on patch will remove it in HEAD. In passing, do some minor cleanup for commit 5c1560606 (in HEAD only), notably removing a duplicate newrnode assignment. Patch by me, using a core idea due to Andres Freund. Back-patch to all supported branches, as 3dbb317d3 was. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/28926.1556664156@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Fix unused variable compiler warning in !debug builds.Andres Freund2019-04-30
| | | | | | | | Introduced in 3dbb317d3. Fix by using the new local variable in more places. Reported-By: Bruce Momjian (off-list) Backpatch: 9.4-, like 3dbb317d3
* Clean up handling of constraint_exclusion and enable_partition_pruning.Tom Lane2019-04-30
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The interaction of these parameters was a bit confused/confusing, and in fact v11 entirely misses the opportunity to apply partition constraints when a partition is accessed directly (rather than indirectly from its parent). In HEAD, establish the principle that enable_partition_pruning controls partition pruning and nothing else. When accessing a partition via its parent, we do partition pruning (if enabled by enable_partition_pruning) and then there is no need to consider partition constraints in the constraint_exclusion logic. When accessing a partition directly, its partition constraints are applied by the constraint_exclusion logic, only if constraint_exclusion = on. In v11, we can't have such a clean division of these GUCs' effects, partly because we don't want to break compatibility too much in a released branch, and partly because the clean coding requires inheritance_planner to have applied partition pruning to a partitioned target table, which it doesn't in v11. However, we can tweak things enough to cover the missed case, which seems like a good idea since it's potentially a performance regression from v10. This patch keeps v11's previous behavior in which enable_partition_pruning overrides constraint_exclusion for an inherited target table, though. In HEAD, also teach relation_excluded_by_constraints that it's okay to use inheritable constraints when trying to prune a traditional inheritance tree. This might not be thought worthy of effort given that that feature is semi-deprecated now, but we have enough infrastructure that it only takes a couple more lines of code to do it correctly. Amit Langote and Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9813f079-f16b-61c8-9ab7-4363cab28d80@lab.ntt.co.jp Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/29069.1555970894@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Fix potential assertion failure when reindexing a pg_class index.Andres Freund2019-04-29
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | When reindexing individual indexes on pg_class it was possible to either trigger an assertion failure: TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(!ReindexIsProcessingIndex(((index)->rd_id))) That's because reindex_index() called SetReindexProcessing() - which enables an asserts ensuring no index insertions happen into the index - before calling RelationSetNewRelfilenode(). That not correct for indexes on pg_class, because RelationSetNewRelfilenode() updates the relevant pg_class row, which needs to update the indexes. The are two reasons this wasn't noticed earlier. Firstly the bug doesn't trigger when reindexing all of pg_class, as reindex_relation has code "hiding" all yet-to-be-reindexed indexes. Secondly, the bug only triggers when the the update to pg_class doesn't turn out to be a HOT update - otherwise there's no index insertion to trigger the bug. Most of the time there's enough space, making this bug hard to trigger. To fix, move RelationSetNewRelfilenode() to before the SetReindexProcessing() (and, together with some other code, to outside of the PG_TRY()). To make sure the error checking intended by SetReindexProcessing() is more robust, modify CatalogIndexInsert() to check ReindexIsProcessingIndex() even when the update is a HOT update. Also add a few regression tests for REINDEXing of system catalogs. The last two improvements would have prevented some of the issues fixed in 5c1560606dc4c from being introduced in the first place. Reported-By: Michael Paquier Diagnosed-By: Tom Lane and Andres Freund Author: Andres Freund Reviewed-By: Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190418011430.GA19133@paquier.xyz Backpatch: 9.4-, the bug is present in all branches
* Fix potential catalog corruption with temporary identity columnsPeter Eisentraut2019-04-29
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | If a temporary table with an identity column and ON COMMIT DROP is created in a single-statement transaction (not useful, but allowed), it would leave the catalog corrupted. We need to add a CommandCounterIncrement() so that PreCommit_on_commit_actions() sees the created dependency between table and sequence and can clean it up. The analogous and more useful case of doing this in a transaction block already runs some CommandCounterIncrement() before it gets to the on-commit cleanup, so it wasn't a problem in practical use. Several locations for placing the new CommandCounterIncrement() call were discussed. This patch places it at the end of standard_ProcessUtility(). That would also help if other commands were to create catalog entries that some on-commit action would like to see. Bug: #15631 Reported-by: Serge Latyntsev <dnsl48@gmail.com> Author: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
* Apply stopgap fix for bug #15672.Tom Lane2019-04-26
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Fix DefineIndex so that it doesn't attempt to pass down a to-be-reused index relfilenode to a child index creation, and fix TryReuseIndex to not think that reuse is sensible for a partitioned index. In v11, this fixes a problem where ALTER TABLE on a partitioned table could assign the same relfilenode to several different child indexes, causing very nasty catalog corruption --- in fact, attempting to DROP the partitioned table then leads not only to a database crash, but to inability to restart because the same crash will recur during WAL replay. Either of these two changes would be enough to prevent the failure, but since neither action could possibly be sane, let's put in both changes for future-proofing. In HEAD, no such bug manifests, but that's just an accidental consequence of having changed the pg_class representation of partitioned indexes to have relfilenode = 0. Both of these changes still seem like smart future-proofing. This is only a stop-gap because the code for ALTER TABLE on a partitioned table with a no-op type change still leaves a great deal to be desired. As the added regression tests show, it gets things wrong for comments on child indexes/constraints, and it is regenerating child indexes it doesn't have to. However, fixing those problems will take more work which may not get back-patched into v11. We need a fix for the corruption problem now. Per bug #15672 from Jianing Yang. Patch by me, regression test cases based on work by Amit Langote, who also did a lot of the investigative work. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15672-b9fa7db32698269f@postgresql.org
* Fix partitioned index attachmentAlvaro Herrera2019-04-25
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | When an existing index in a partition is attached to a new index on its parent, we forgot to set the "relispartition" flag correctly, which meant that it was not possible to find the index in various operations, such as adding a foreign key constraint that references that partitioned table. One of four places that was assigning the parent index was forgetting to do that, so fix by shifting responsibility of updating the flag to the routine that changes the parent. Author: Amit Langote, Álvaro Herrera Reported-by: Hubert "depesz" Lubaczewski Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqHMsRtRYRWYTWavKJ8x14AFsv7bmAV46mYwnfD3vy8goQ@mail.gmail.com
* Fix some minor postmaster-state-machine issues.Tom Lane2019-04-24
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | In sigusr1_handler, don't ignore PMSIGNAL_ADVANCE_STATE_MACHINE based on pmState. The restriction is unnecessary (PostmasterStateMachine should work in any state), not future-proof (since it makes too many assumptions about why the signal might be sent), and broken even today because a race condition can make it necessary to respond to the signal in PM_WAIT_READONLY state. The race condition seems unlikely, but if it did happen, a hot-standby postmaster could fail to shut down after receiving a smart-shutdown request. In MaybeStartWalReceiver, don't clear the WalReceiverRequested flag if the fork attempt fails. Leaving it set allows us to try again in future iterations of the postmaster idle loop. (The startup process would eventually send a fresh request signal, but this change may allow us to retry the fork sooner.) Remove an obsolete comment and unnecessary test in PostmasterStateMachine's handling of PM_SHUTDOWN_2 state. It's not possible to have a live walreceiver in that state, and AFAICT has not been possible since commit 5e85315ea. This isn't a live bug, but the false comment is quite confusing to readers. In passing, rearrange sigusr1_handler's CheckPromoteSignal tests so that we don't uselessly perform stat() calls that we're going to ignore the results of. Add some comments clarifying the behavior of MaybeStartWalReceiver; I very nearly rearranged it in a way that'd reintroduce the race condition fixed in e5d494d78. Mea culpa for not commenting that properly at the time. Back-patch to all supported branches. The PMSIGNAL_ADVANCE_STATE_MACHINE change is the only one of even minor significance, but we might as well keep this code in sync across branches. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/9001.1556046681@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Repair assorted issues in locale data extraction.Tom Lane2019-04-23
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | cache_locale_time (extraction of LC_TIME-related info) had never been taught the lessons we previously learned about extraction of info related to LC_MONETARY and LC_NUMERIC. Specifically, commit 95a777c61 taught PGLC_localeconv() that data coming out of localeconv() was in an encoding determined by the relevant locale, but we didn't realize that there's a similar issue with strftime(). And commit a4930e7ca hardened PGLC_localeconv() against errors occurring partway through, but failed to do likewise for cache_locale_time(). So, rearrange the latter function to perform encoding conversion and not risk failure while it's got the locales set to temporary values. This time around I also changed PGLC_localeconv() to treat it as FATAL if it can't restore the previous settings of the locale values. There is no reason (except possibly OOM) for that to fail, and proceeding with the wrong locale values seems like a seriously bad idea --- especially on Windows where we have to also temporarily change LC_CTYPE. Also, protect against the possibility that we can't identify the codeset reported for LC_MONETARY or LC_NUMERIC; rather than just failing, try to validate the data without conversion. The user-visible symptom this fixes is that if LC_TIME is set to a locale name that implies an encoding different from the database encoding, non-ASCII localized day and month names would be retrieved in the wrong encoding, leading to either unexpected encoding-conversion error reports or wrong output from to_char(). The other possible failure modes are unlikely enough that we've not seen reports of them, AFAIK. The encoding conversion problems do not manifest on Windows, since we'd already created special-case code to handle that issue there. Per report from Juan José Santamaría Flecha. Back-patch to all supported versions. Juan José Santamaría Flecha and Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAC+AXB22So5aZm2vZe+MChYXec7gWfr-n-SK-iO091R0P_1Tew@mail.gmail.com
* Fix detection of passwords hashed with MD5 or SCRAM-SHA-256Michael Paquier2019-04-23
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This commit fixes a couple of issues related to the way password verifiers hashed with MD5 or SCRAM-SHA-256 are detected, leading to being able to store in catalogs passwords which do not follow the supported hash formats: - A MD5-hashed entry was checked based on if its header uses "md5" and if the string length matches what is expected. Unfortunately the code never checked if the hash only used hexadecimal characters, as reported by Tom Lane. - A SCRAM-hashed entry was checked based on only its header, which should be "SCRAM-SHA-256$", but it never checked for any fields afterwards, as reported by Jonathan Katz. Backpatch down to v10, which is where SCRAM has been introduced, and where password verifiers in plain format have been removed. Author: Jonathan Katz Reviewed-by: Tom Lane, Michael Paquier Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/016deb6b-1f0a-8e9f-1833-a8675b170aa9@postgresql.org Backpatch-through: 10
* Fix problems with auto-held portals.Tom Lane2019-04-19
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | HoldPinnedPortals() did things in the wrong order: it must not mark a portal autoHeld until it's been successfully held. Otherwise, a failure while persisting the portal results in a server crash because we think the portal is in a good state when it's not. Also add a check that portal->status is READY before attempting to hold a pinned portal. We have such a check before the only other use of HoldPortal(), so it seems unwise not to check it here. Lastly, rethink the responsibility for where to call HoldPinnedPortals. The comment for it imagined that it was optional for any individual PL to call it or not, but that cannot be the case: if some outer level of procedure has a pinned portal, failing to persist it when an inner procedure commits is going to be trouble. Let's have SPI do it instead of the individual PLs. That's not a complete solution, since in theory a PL might not be using SPI to perform commit/rollback, but such a PL is going to have to be aware of lots of related requirements anyway. (This change doesn't cause an API break for any external PLs that might be calling HoldPinnedPortals per the old regime, because calling it twice during a commit or rollback sequence won't hurt.) Per bug #15703 from Julian Schauder. Back-patch to v11 where this code came in. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15703-c12c5bc0ea34ba26@postgresql.org
* Fix handling of temp and unlogged tables in FOR ALL TABLES publicationsPeter Eisentraut2019-04-18
| | | | | | | | | | | If a FOR ALL TABLES publication exists, temporary and unlogged tables are ignored for publishing changes. But CheckCmdReplicaIdentity() would still check in that case that such a table has a replica identity set before accepting updates. To fix, have GetRelationPublicationActions() return that such a table publishes no actions. Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/f3f151f7-c4dd-1646-b998-f60bd6217dd3@2ndquadrant.com
* postgresql.conf.sample: add proper defaults for include actionsBruce Momjian2019-04-17
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Previously, include actions include_dir, include_if_exists, and include listed commented-out values which were not the defaults, which is inconsistent with other entries. Instead, replace them with '', which is the default value. Reported-by: Emanuel Araújo Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMuTAkYMx6Q27wpELDR3_v9aG443y7ZjeXu15_+1nGUjhMWOJA@mail.gmail.com Backpatch-through: 9.4
* Fix division by zero in _bt_vacuum_needs_cleanup()Alexander Korotkov2019-04-15
| | | | | | | | | | | Checks inside _bt_vacuum_needs_cleanup() allow division by zero to happen when metad->btm_last_cleanup_num_heap_tuples == 0. This commit adjusts the expression so that no division by zero might happen. Reported-by: Piotr Stefaniak Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/DB8PR03MB5931C41F7787A95313F08322F22A0%40DB8PR03MB5931.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com Reviewed-by: Masahiko Sawada Backpatch-through: 11
* Fix SHOW ALL command for non-superusers with replication connectionMichael Paquier2019-04-15
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Since Postgres 10, SHOW commands can be triggered with replication connections in a WAL sender context, however it missed that a transaction context is needed for syscache lookups. This commit makes sure that the syscache lookups can happen correctly by setting a transaction context when running SHOW commands in a WAL sender. Superuser-only parameters can be displayed using SHOW commands not only to superusers, but also to members of system role pg_read_all_settings, which requires a syscache lookup to check if the connected role is a member of this system role or not, or the instance crashes. Superusers do not need to check the syscache so it worked correctly in this case. New tests are added to cover this issue. Reported-by: Alexander Kukushkin Author: Michael Paquier Reviewed-by: Álvaro Herrera Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15734-2daa8761eeed8e20@postgresql.org Backpatch-through: 10
* Prevent memory leaks associated with relcache rd_partcheck structures.Tom Lane2019-04-13
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The original coding of generate_partition_qual() just copied the list of predicate expressions into the global CacheMemoryContext, making it effectively impossible to clean up when the owning relcache entry is destroyed --- the relevant code in RelationDestroyRelation() only managed to free the topmost List header :-(. This resulted in a session-lifespan memory leak whenever a table partition's relcache entry is rebuilt. Fortunately, that's not normally a large data structure, and rebuilds shouldn't occur all that often in production situations; but this is still a bug worth fixing back to v10 where the code was introduced. To fix, put the cached expression tree into its own small memory context, as we do with other complicated substructures of relcache entries. Also, deal more honestly with the case that a partition has an empty partcheck list; while that probably isn't a case that's very interesting for production use, it's legal. In passing, clarify comments about how partitioning-related relcache data structures are managed, and add some Asserts that we're not leaking old copies when we overwrite these data fields. Amit Langote and Tom Lane Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/7961.1552498252@sss.pgh.pa.us