database/postgres
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/postgres/postgres.git synced 2025-08-18 12:22:09 +03:00
Code Activity

pgindent run for 9.5

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Bruce Momjian
2015-05-23 21:35:49 -04:00
parent 225892552b
commit 807b9e0dff
414 changed files with 5810 additions and 5308 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

94
src/backend/executor/execMain.c
View File

@@ -153,16 +153,16 @@ standard_ExecutorStart(QueryDesc *queryDesc, int eflags)
* If the transaction is read-only, we need to check if any writes are
* planned to non-temporary tables. EXPLAIN is considered read-only.
*
* Don't allow writes in parallel mode. Supporting UPDATE and DELETE would
* require (a) storing the combocid hash in shared memory, rather than
* synchronizing it just once at the start of parallelism, and (b) an
* Don't allow writes in parallel mode. Supporting UPDATE and DELETE
* would require (a) storing the combocid hash in shared memory, rather
* than synchronizing it just once at the start of parallelism, and (b) an
* alternative to heap_update()'s reliance on xmax for mutual exclusion.
* INSERT may have no such troubles, but we forbid it to simplify the
* checks.
*
* We have lower-level defenses in CommandCounterIncrement and elsewhere
* against performing unsafe operations in parallel mode, but this gives
* a more user-friendly error message.
* against performing unsafe operations in parallel mode, but this gives a
* more user-friendly error message.
*/
if ((XactReadOnly || IsInParallelMode()) &&
!(eflags & EXEC_FLAG_EXPLAIN_ONLY))
@@ -670,14 +670,14 @@ ExecCheckRTEPerms(RangeTblEntry *rte)
*/
if (remainingPerms & ACL_INSERT && !ExecCheckRTEPermsModified(relOid,
userid,
rte->insertedCols,
ACL_INSERT))
rte->insertedCols,
ACL_INSERT))
return false;
if (remainingPerms & ACL_UPDATE && !ExecCheckRTEPermsModified(relOid,
userid,
rte->updatedCols,
ACL_UPDATE))
rte->updatedCols,
ACL_UPDATE))
return false;
}
return true;
@@ -695,10 +695,9 @@ ExecCheckRTEPermsModified(Oid relOid, Oid userid, Bitmapset *modifiedCols,
int col = -1;
/*
* When the query doesn't explicitly update any columns, allow the
* query if we have permission on any column of the rel. This is
* to handle SELECT FOR UPDATE as well as possible corner cases in
* UPDATE.
* When the query doesn't explicitly update any columns, allow the query
* if we have permission on any column of the rel. This is to handle
* SELECT FOR UPDATE as well as possible corner cases in UPDATE.
*/
if (bms_is_empty(modifiedCols))
{
@@ -742,8 +741,8 @@ ExecCheckXactReadOnly(PlannedStmt *plannedstmt)
ListCell *l;
/*
* Fail if write permissions are requested in parallel mode for
* table (temp or non-temp), otherwise fail for any non-temp table.
* Fail if write permissions are requested in parallel mode for table
* (temp or non-temp), otherwise fail for any non-temp table.
*/
foreach(l, plannedstmt->rtable)
{
@@ -1665,9 +1664,9 @@ ExecConstraints(ResultRelInfo *resultRelInfo,
Relation rel = resultRelInfo->ri_RelationDesc;
TupleDesc tupdesc = RelationGetDescr(rel);
TupleConstr *constr = tupdesc->constr;
Bitmapset *modifiedCols;
Bitmapset *insertedCols;
Bitmapset *updatedCols;
Bitmapset *modifiedCols;
Bitmapset *insertedCols;
Bitmapset *updatedCols;
Assert(constr);
@@ -1722,7 +1721,7 @@ ExecConstraints(ResultRelInfo *resultRelInfo,
(errcode(ERRCODE_CHECK_VIOLATION),
errmsg("new row for relation \"%s\" violates check constraint \"%s\"",
RelationGetRelationName(rel), failed),
val_desc ? errdetail("Failing row contains %s.", val_desc) : 0,
val_desc ? errdetail("Failing row contains %s.", val_desc) : 0,
errtableconstraint(rel, failed)));
}
}
@@ -1773,11 +1772,11 @@ ExecWithCheckOptions(WCOKind kind, ResultRelInfo *resultRelInfo,
/*
* WITH CHECK OPTION checks are intended to ensure that the new tuple
* is visible (in the case of a view) or that it passes the
* 'with-check' policy (in the case of row security).
* If the qual evaluates to NULL or FALSE, then the new tuple won't be
* included in the view or doesn't pass the 'with-check' policy for the
* table. We need ExecQual to return FALSE for NULL to handle the view
* case (the opposite of what we do above for CHECK constraints).
* 'with-check' policy (in the case of row security). If the qual
* evaluates to NULL or FALSE, then the new tuple won't be included in
* the view or doesn't pass the 'with-check' policy for the table. We
* need ExecQual to return FALSE for NULL to handle the view case (the
* opposite of what we do above for CHECK constraints).
*/
if (!ExecQual((List *) wcoExpr, econtext, false))
{
@@ -1788,14 +1787,15 @@ ExecWithCheckOptions(WCOKind kind, ResultRelInfo *resultRelInfo,
switch (wco->kind)
{
/*
* For WITH CHECK OPTIONs coming from views, we might be able to
* provide the details on the row, depending on the permissions
* on the relation (that is, if the user could view it directly
* anyway). For RLS violations, we don't include the data since
* we don't know if the user should be able to view the tuple as
* as that depends on the USING policy.
*/
/*
* For WITH CHECK OPTIONs coming from views, we might be
* able to provide the details on the row, depending on
* the permissions on the relation (that is, if the user
* could view it directly anyway). For RLS violations, we
* don't include the data since we don't know if the user
* should be able to view the tuple as as that depends on
* the USING policy.
*/
case WCO_VIEW_CHECK:
insertedCols = GetInsertedColumns(resultRelInfo, estate);
updatedCols = GetUpdatedColumns(resultRelInfo, estate);
@@ -1808,8 +1808,8 @@ ExecWithCheckOptions(WCOKind kind, ResultRelInfo *resultRelInfo,
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode(ERRCODE_WITH_CHECK_OPTION_VIOLATION),
errmsg("new row violates WITH CHECK OPTION for \"%s\"",
wco->relname),
errmsg("new row violates WITH CHECK OPTION for \"%s\"",
wco->relname),
val_desc ? errdetail("Failing row contains %s.",
val_desc) : 0));
break;
@@ -1817,14 +1817,14 @@ ExecWithCheckOptions(WCOKind kind, ResultRelInfo *resultRelInfo,
case WCO_RLS_UPDATE_CHECK:
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode(ERRCODE_INSUFFICIENT_PRIVILEGE),
errmsg("new row violates row level security policy for \"%s\"",
wco->relname)));
errmsg("new row violates row level security policy for \"%s\"",
wco->relname)));
break;
case WCO_RLS_CONFLICT_CHECK:
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode(ERRCODE_INSUFFICIENT_PRIVILEGE),
errmsg("new row violates row level security policy (USING expression) for \"%s\"",
wco->relname)));
errmsg("new row violates row level security policy (USING expression) for \"%s\"",
wco->relname)));
break;
default:
elog(ERROR, "unrecognized WCO kind: %u", wco->kind);
@@ -1915,8 +1915,8 @@ ExecBuildSlotValueDescription(Oid reloid,
{
/*
* No table-level SELECT, so need to make sure they either have
* SELECT rights on the column or that they have provided the
* data for the column. If not, omit this column from the error
* SELECT rights on the column or that they have provided the data
* for the column. If not, omit this column from the error
* message.
*/
aclresult = pg_attribute_aclcheck(reloid, tupdesc->attrs[i]->attnum,
@@ -2258,14 +2258,14 @@ EvalPlanQualFetch(EState *estate, Relation relation, int lockmode,
break;
case LockWaitSkip:
if (!ConditionalXactLockTableWait(SnapshotDirty.xmax))
return NULL; /* skip instead of waiting */
return NULL; /* skip instead of waiting */
break;
case LockWaitError:
if (!ConditionalXactLockTableWait(SnapshotDirty.xmax))
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode(ERRCODE_LOCK_NOT_AVAILABLE),
errmsg("could not obtain lock on row in relation \"%s\"",
RelationGetRelationName(relation))));
RelationGetRelationName(relation))));
break;
}
continue; /* loop back to repeat heap_fetch */
@@ -2313,9 +2313,9 @@ EvalPlanQualFetch(EState *estate, Relation relation, int lockmode,
* doing so would require changing heap_update and
* heap_delete to not complain about updating "invisible"
* tuples, which seems pretty scary (heap_lock_tuple will
* not complain, but few callers expect HeapTupleInvisible,
* and we're not one of them). So for now, treat the tuple
* as deleted and do not process.
* not complain, but few callers expect
* HeapTupleInvisible, and we're not one of them). So for
* now, treat the tuple as deleted and do not process.
*/
ReleaseBuffer(buffer);
return NULL;
@@ -2563,8 +2563,8 @@ EvalPlanQualFetchRowMarks(EPQState *epqstate)
if (fdwroutine->RefetchForeignRow == NULL)
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED),
errmsg("cannot lock rows in foreign table \"%s\"",
RelationGetRelationName(erm->relation))));
errmsg("cannot lock rows in foreign table \"%s\"",
RelationGetRelationName(erm->relation))));
copyTuple = fdwroutine->RefetchForeignRow(epqstate->estate,
erm,
datum,