Fix testing of parallel-safety of SubPlans.

is_parallel_safe() supposed that the only relevant property of a SubPlan
was the parallel safety of the referenced subplan tree.  This is wrong:
the testexpr or args subtrees might contain parallel-unsafe stuff, as
demonstrated by the test case added here.  However, just recursing into the
subtrees fails in a different way: we'll typically find PARAM_EXEC Params
representing the subplan's output columns in the testexpr.  The previous
coding supposed that any Param must be treated as parallel-restricted, so
that a naive attempt at fixing this disabled parallel pushdown of SubPlans
altogether.  We must instead determine, for any visited Param, whether it
is one that would be computed by a surrounding SubPlan node; if so, it's
safe to push down along with the SubPlan node.

We might later be able to extend this logic to cope with Params used for
correlated subplans and other cases; but that's a task for v11 or beyond.

Tom Lane and Amit Kapila

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/7064.1492022469@sss.pgh.pa.us

src/include/nodes/primnodes.h

@@ -699,7 +699,8 @@ typedef struct SubPlan
 	bool		unknownEqFalse; /* TRUE if it's okay to return FALSE when the
 								 * spec result is UNKNOWN; this allows much
 								 * simpler handling of null values */
-	bool		parallel_safe;	/* OK to use as part of parallel plan? */
+	bool		parallel_safe;	/* is the subplan parallel-safe? */
+	/* Note: parallel_safe does not consider contents of testexpr or args */
 	/* Information for passing params into and out of the subselect: */
 	/* setParam and parParam are lists of integers (param IDs) */
 	List	   *setParam;		/* initplan subqueries have to set these