There's a very low risk that RecentGlobalXmin could be far enough in
the past to be older than relfrozenxid, or even wrapped
around. Luckily the consequences of that having happened wouldn't be
too bad - the page wouldn't be pruned for a while.
Avoid that risk by using TransactionXmin instead. As that's announced
via MyPgXact->xmin, it is protected against wrapping around (see code
comments for details around relfrozenxid).
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200328213023.s4eyijhdosuc4vcj@alap3.anarazel.de
Backpatch: 9.5-
This reverts commit cb2fd7eac285b1b0a24eeb2b8ed4456b66c5a09f. Per
numerous buildfarm members, it was incompatible with parallel query, and
a test case assumed LP64. Back-patch to 9.5 (all supported versions).
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200321224920.GB1763544@rfd.leadboat.com
Until now, only selected bulk operations (e.g. COPY) did this. If a
given relfilenode received both a WAL-skipping COPY and a WAL-logged
operation (e.g. INSERT), recovery could lose tuples from the COPY. See
src/backend/access/transam/README section "Skipping WAL for New
RelFileNode" for the new coding rules. Maintainers of table access
methods should examine that section.
To maintain data durability, just before commit, we choose between an
fsync of the relfilenode and copying its contents to WAL. A new GUC,
wal_skip_threshold, guides that choice. If this change slows a workload
that creates small, permanent relfilenodes under wal_level=minimal, try
adjusting wal_skip_threshold. Users setting a timeout on COMMIT may
need to adjust that timeout, and log_min_duration_statement analysis
will reflect time consumption moving to COMMIT from commands like COPY.
Internally, this requires a reliable determination of whether
RollbackAndReleaseCurrentSubTransaction() would unlink a relation's
current relfilenode. Introduce rd_firstRelfilenodeSubid. Amend the
specification of rd_createSubid such that the field is zero when a new
rel has an old rd_node. Make relcache.c retain entries for certain
dropped relations until end of transaction.
Back-patch to 9.5 (all supported versions). This introduces a new WAL
record type, XLOG_GIST_ASSIGN_LSN, without bumping XLOG_PAGE_MAGIC. As
always, update standby systems before master systems. This changes
sizeof(RelationData) and sizeof(IndexStmt), breaking binary
compatibility for affected extensions. (The most recent commit to
affect the same class of extensions was
089e4d405d0f3b94c74a2c6a54357a84a681754b.)
Kyotaro Horiguchi, reviewed (in earlier, similar versions) by Robert
Haas. Heikki Linnakangas and Michael Paquier implemented earlier
designs that materially clarified the problem. Reviewed, in earlier
designs, by Andrew Dunstan, Andres Freund, Alvaro Herrera, Tom Lane,
Fujii Masao, and Simon Riggs. Reported by Martijn van Oosterhout.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20150702220524.GA9392@svana.org
Some of these are quite old, but that doesn't make them not bugs.
We'd rather report a failure via elog than SIGSEGV.
While at it, uniformly spell the error check as !RelationIsValid(rel)
rather than a bare rel == NULL test. The machine code is the same
but it seems better to be consistent.
Coverity complained about this today, not sure why, because the
mistake is in fact old.
In serializable mode, heap_hot_search_buffer() incorrectly acquired a
predicate lock on the root tuple, not the returned tuple that satisfied
the visibility checks. As explained in README-SSI, the predicate lock does
not need to be copied or extended to other tuple versions, but for that to
work, the correct, visible, tuple version must be locked in the first
place.
The original SSI commit had this bug in it, but it was fixed back in 2013,
in commit 81fbbfe335. But unfortunately, it was reintroduced a few months
later in commit b89e151054. Wising up from that, add a regression test
to cover this, so that it doesn't get reintroduced again. Also, move the
code that sets 't_self', so that it happens at the same time that the
other HeapTuple fields are set, to make it more clear that all the code in
the loop operate on the "current" tuple in the chain, not the root tuple.
Bug spotted by Andres Freund, analysis and original fix by Thomas Munro,
test case and some additional changes to the fix by Heikki Linnakangas.
Backpatch to all supported versions (9.4).
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20190731210630.nqhszuktygwftjty%40alap3.anarazel.de
This puts back reverted commit de87a084c0a5, with some bug fixes.
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 T1
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 T1
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 T1 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 T1 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
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2815.1560521451@sss.pgh.pa.us
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
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
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.
When logging the replica identity of a deleted tuple, XLOG_HEAP_DELETE
records include references of the old tuple. Its data is stored in an
intermediate variable used to register this information for the WAL
record, but this variable gets away from the stack when the record gets
actually inserted.
Spotted by clang's AddressSanitizer.
Author: Stas Kelvish
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/085C8825-AD86-4E93-AF80-E26CDF03D1EA@postgrespro.ru
Backpatch-through: 9.4
Repeatedly rewriting a mapped catalog table with VACUUM FULL or
CLUSTER could cause logical decoding to fail with:
ERROR, "could not map filenode \"%s\" to relation OID"
To trigger the problem the rewritten catalog had to have live tuples
with toasted columns.
The problem was triggered as during catalog table rewrites the
heap_insert() check that prevents logical decoding information to be
emitted for system catalogs, failed to treat the new heap's toast table
as a system catalog (because the new heap is not recognized as a
catalog table via RelationIsLogicallyLogged()). The relmapper, in
contrast to the normal catalog contents, does not contain historical
information. After a single rewrite of a mapped table the new relation
is known to the relmapper, but if the table is rewritten twice before
logical decoding occurs, the relfilenode cannot be mapped to a
relation anymore. Which then leads us to error out. This only
happens for toast tables, because the main table contents aren't
re-inserted with heap_insert().
The fix is simple, add a new heap_insert() flag that prevents logical
decoding information from being emitted, and accept during decoding
that there might not be tuple data for toast tables.
Unfortunately that does not fix pre-existing logical decoding
errors. Doing so would require not throwing an error when a filenode
cannot be mapped to a relation during decoding, and that seems too
likely to hide bugs. If it's crucial to fix decoding for an existing
slot, temporarily changing the ERROR in ReorderBufferCommit() to a
WARNING appears to be the best fix.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180914021046.oi7dm4ra3ot2g2kt@alap3.anarazel.de
Backpatch: 9.4-, where logical decoding was introduced
There's a project policy against using plain "char buf[BLCKSZ]" local
or static variables as page buffers; preferred style is to palloc or
malloc each buffer to ensure it is MAXALIGN'd. However, that policy's
been ignored in an increasing number of places. We've apparently got
away with it so far, probably because (a) relatively few people use
platforms on which misalignment causes core dumps and/or (b) the
variables chance to be sufficiently aligned anyway. But this is not
something to rely on. Moreover, even if we don't get a core dump,
we might be paying a lot of cycles for misaligned accesses.
To fix, invent new union types PGAlignedBlock and PGAlignedXLogBlock
that the compiler must allocate with sufficient alignment, and use
those in place of plain char arrays.
I used these types even for variables where there's no risk of a
misaligned access, since ensuring proper alignment should make
kernel data transfers faster. I also changed some places where
we had been palloc'ing short-lived buffers, for coding style
uniformity and to save palloc/pfree overhead.
Since this seems to be a live portability hazard (despite the lack
of field reports), back-patch to all supported versions.
Patch by me; thanks to Michael Paquier for review.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1535618100.1286.3.camel@credativ.de
We aren't very strict about keeping FSM up to date on WAL replay,
because per-page freespace values aren't critical in replicas (can't
write to heap in a replica; and if the replica is promoted, the values
would be updated by VACUUM anyway). However, VACUUM since 9.6 can skip
processing pages marked all-visible or all-frozen, and if such pages are
recorded in FSM with wrong values, those values are blindly propagated
to FSM's upper layers by VACUUM's FreeSpaceMapVacuum. (This rationale
assumes that crashes are not very frequent, because those would cause
outdated FSM to occur in the primary.)
Even when the FSM is outdated in standby, things are not too bad
normally, because, most per-page FSM values will be zero (other than
those propagated with the base-backup that created the standby); only
once the remaining free space is less than 0.2*BLCKSZ the per-page value
is maintained by WAL replay of heap ins/upd/del. However, if
wal_log_hints=on causes complete FSM pages to be propagated to a standby
via full-page images, many too-optimistic per-page values can end up
being registered in the standby.
Incorrect per-page values aren't critical in most cases, since an
inserter that is given a page that doesn't actually contain the claimed
free space will update FSM with the correct value, and retry until it
finds a usable page. However, if there are many such updates to do, an
inserter can spend a long time doing them before a usable page is found;
in a heavily trafficked insert-only table with many concurrent inserters
this has been observed to cause several second stalls, causing visible
application malfunction.
To fix this problem, it seems sufficient to have heap_xlog_visible
(replay of setting all-visible and all-frozen VM bits for a heap page)
update the FSM value for the page being processed. This fixes the
per-page counters together with making the page skippable to vacuum, so
when vacuum does FreeSpaceMapVacuum, the values propagated to FSM upper
layers are the correct ones, avoiding the problem.
While at it, apply the same fix to heap_xlog_clean (replay of tuple
removal by HOT pruning and vacuum). This makes any space freed by the
cleaning available earlier than the next vacuum in the promoted replica.
Backpatch to 9.6, where this problem was diagnosed on an insert-only
table with all-frozen pages, which were introduced as a concept in that
release. Theoretically it could apply with all-visible pages to older
branches, but there's been no report of that and it doesn't backpatch
cleanly anyway.
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180802172857.5skoexsilnjvgruk@alvherre.pgsql
Dan Wood diagnosed a long-standing problem that pages containing tuples
that are locked by multixacts containing live lockers may spuriously end
up as candidates for getting their all-visible flag set. This has the
long-term effect that multixacts remain unfrozen; this may previously
pass undetected, but since commit XYZ it would be reported as
"ERROR: found multixact 134100944 from before relminmxid 192042633"
because when a later vacuum tries to freeze the page it detects that a
multixact that should have gotten frozen, wasn't.
Dan proposed a (correct) patch that simply sets a variable to its
correct value, after a bogus initialization. But, per discussion, it
seems better coding to avoid the bogus initializations altogether, since
they could give rise to more bugs later. Therefore this fix rewrites
the logic a little bit to avoid depending on the bogus initializations.
This bug was part of a family introduced in 9.6 by commit a892234f830e;
later, commit 38e9f90a227d fixed most of them, but this one was
unnoticed.
Authors: Dan Wood, Pavan Deolasee, Álvaro Herrera
Reviewed-by: Masahiko Sawada, Pavan Deolasee, Álvaro Herrera
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/84EBAC55-F06D-4FBE-A3F3-8BDA093CE3E3@amazon.com
Sloppy coding in this function could lead to leaking a VM buffer pin,
or to attempting to free the same pin twice. Repair. While at it,
reduce the code's tendency to free and reacquire the same page pin.
Back-patch to 9.6; before that, this routine did not concern itself
with VM pages.
Amit Kapila and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAA4eK1KJKwhc=isgTQHjM76CAdVswzNeAuZkh_cx-6QgGkSEgA@mail.gmail.com
Commit 4800f16a7ad0 added some sanity checks to ensure we don't
accidentally corrupt data, but in one of them we failed to consider the
effects of a database upgraded from 9.2 or earlier, where a tuple
exclusively locked prior to the upgrade has a slightly different bit
pattern. Fix that by using the macro that we fixed in commit
74ebba84aeb6 for similar situations.
Reported-by: Alexandre Garcia
Reviewed-by: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAPYLKR6yxV4=pfW0Gwij7aPNiiPx+3ib4USVYnbuQdUtmkMaEA@mail.gmail.com
Andres suspects that this bug may have wider ranging consequences, but I
couldn't find anything.
The previous commit has shown that the sanity checks around freezing
aren't strong enough. Strengthening them seems especially important
because the existance of the bug has caused corruption that we don't
want to make even worse during future vacuum cycles.
The errors are emitted with ereport rather than elog, despite being
"should never happen" messages, so a proper error code is emitted. To
avoid superflous translations, mark messages as internal.
Author: Andres Freund and Alvaro Herrera
Reviewed-By: Alvaro Herrera, Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20171102112019.33wb7g5wp4zpjelu@alap3.anarazel.de
Backpatch: 9.3-
It turns out we misdiagnosed what the real problem was. Revert the
previous changes, because they may have worse consequences going
forward. A better fix is forthcoming.
The simplistic test case is kept, though disabled.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20171102112019.33wb7g5wp4zpjelu@alap3.anarazel.de
When some tuple versions in an update chain are frozen due to them being
older than freeze_min_age, the xmax/xmin trail can become broken. This
breaks HOT (and probably other things). A subsequent VACUUM can break
things in more serious ways, such as leaving orphan heap-only tuples
whose root HOT redirect items were removed. This can be seen because
index creation (or REINDEX) complain like
ERROR: XX000: failed to find parent tuple for heap-only tuple at (0,7) in table "t"
Because of relfrozenxid contraints, we cannot avoid the freezing of the
early tuples, so we must cope with the results: whenever we see an Xmin
of FrozenTransactionId, consider it a match for whatever the previous
Xmax value was.
This problem seems to have appeared in 9.3 with multixact changes,
though strictly speaking it seems unrelated.
Since 9.4 we have commit 37484ad2a "Change the way we mark tuples as
frozen", so the fix is simple: just compare the raw Xmin (still stored
in the tuple header, since freezing merely set an infomask bit) to the
Xmax. But in 9.3 we rewrite the Xmin value to FrozenTransactionId, so
the original value is lost and we have nothing to compare the Xmax with.
To cope with that case we need to compare the Xmin with FrozenXid,
assume it's a match, and hope for the best. Sadly, since you can
pg_upgrade a 9.3 instance containing half-frozen pages to newer
releases, we need to keep the old check in newer versions too, which
seems a bit brittle; I hope we can somehow get rid of that.
I didn't optimize the new function for performance. The new coding is
probably a bit slower than before, since there is a function call rather
than a straight comparison, but I'd rather have it work correctly than
be fast but wrong.
This is a followup after 20b655224249 fixed a few related problems.
Apparently, in 9.6 and up there are more ways to get into trouble, but
in 9.3 - 9.5 I cannot reproduce a problem anymore with this patch, so
there must be a separate bug.
Reported-by: Peter Geoghegan
Diagnosed-by: Peter Geoghegan, Michael Paquier, Daniel Wood,
Yi Wen Wong, Álvaro
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-Wznm4rCrhFAiwKPWTpEw2bXDtgROZK7jWWGucXeH3D1fmA@mail.gmail.com
Vacuum calls page-level HOT prune to remove dead HOT tuples before doing
liveness checks (HeapTupleSatisfiesVacuum) on the remaining tuples. But
concurrent transaction commit/abort may turn DEAD some of the HOT tuples
that survived the prune, before HeapTupleSatisfiesVacuum tests them.
This happens to activate the code that decides to freeze the tuple ...
which resuscitates it, duplicating data.
(This is especially bad if there's any unique constraints, because those
are now internally violated due to the duplicate entries, though you
won't know until you try to REINDEX or dump/restore the table.)
One possible fix would be to simply skip doing anything to the tuple,
and hope that the next HOT prune would remove it. But there is a
problem: if the tuple is older than freeze horizon, this would leave an
unfrozen XID behind, and if no HOT prune happens to clean it up before
the containing pg_clog segment is truncated away, it'd later cause an
error when the XID is looked up.
Fix the problem by having the tuple freezing routines cope with the
situation: don't freeze the tuple (and keep it dead). In the cases that
the XID is older than the freeze age, set the HEAP_XMAX_COMMITTED flag
so that there is no need to look up the XID in pg_clog later on.
An isolation test is included, authored by Michael Paquier, loosely
based on Daniel Wood's original reproducer. It only tests one
particular scenario, though, not all the possible ways for this problem
to surface; it be good to have a more reliable way to test this more
fully, but it'd require more work.
In message https://postgr.es/m/20170911140103.5akxptyrwgpc25bw@alvherre.pgsql
I outlined another test case (more closely matching Dan Wood's) that
exposed a few more ways for the problem to occur.
Backpatch all the way back to 9.3, where this problem was introduced by
multixact juggling. In branches 9.3 and 9.4, this includes a backpatch
of commit e5ff9fefcd50 (of 9.5 era), since the original is not
correctable without matching the coding pattern in 9.5 up.
Reported-by: Daniel Wood
Diagnosed-by: Daniel Wood
Reviewed-by: Yi Wen Wong, Michaël Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E5711E62-8FDF-4DCA-A888-C200BF6B5742@amazon.com
Previously, the parallel executor logic did reinitialization of shared
state within the ExecReScan code for parallel-aware scan nodes. This is
problematic, because it means that the ExecReScan call has to occur
synchronously (ie, during the parent Gather node's ReScan call). That is
swimming very much against the tide so far as the ExecReScan machinery is
concerned; the fact that it works at all today depends on a lot of fragile
assumptions, such as that no plan node between Gather and a parallel-aware
scan node is parameterized. Another objection is that because ExecReScan
might be called in workers as well as the leader, hacky extra tests are
needed in some places to prevent unwanted shared-state resets.
Hence, let's separate this code into two functions, a ReInitializeDSM
call and the ReScan call proper. ReInitializeDSM is called only in
the leader and is guaranteed to run before we start new workers.
ReScan is returned to its traditional function of resetting only local
state, which means that ExecReScan's usual habits of delaying or
eliminating child rescan calls are safe again.
As with the preceding commit 7df2c1f8d, it doesn't seem to be necessary
to make these changes in 9.6, which is a good thing because the FDW and
CustomScan APIs are impacted.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAA4eK1JkByysFJNh9M349u_nNjqETuEnY_y1VUc_kJiU0bxtaQ@mail.gmail.com
If several sessions are concurrently locking a tuple update chain with
nonconflicting lock modes using an old snapshot, and they all succeed,
it may happen that some of them fail because of restarting the loop (due
to a concurrent Xmax change) and getting an error in the subsequent pass
while trying to obtain a tuple lock that they already have in some tuple
version.
This can only happen with very high concurrency (where a row is being
both updated and FK-checked by multiple transactions concurrently), but
it's been observed in the field and can have unpleasant consequences
such as an FK check failing to see a tuple that definitely exists:
ERROR: insert or update on table "child_table" violates foreign key constraint "fk_constraint_name"
DETAIL: Key (keyid)=(123456) is not present in table "parent_table".
(where the key is observably present in the table).
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170714210011.r25mrff4nxjhmf3g@alvherre.pgsql
Don't move parenthesized lines to the left, even if that means they
flow past the right margin.
By default, BSD indent lines up statement continuation lines that are
within parentheses so that they start just to the right of the preceding
left parenthesis. However, traditionally, if that resulted in the
continuation line extending to the right of the desired right margin,
then indent would push it left just far enough to not overrun the margin,
if it could do so without making the continuation line start to the left of
the current statement indent. That makes for a weird mix of indentations
unless one has been completely rigid about never violating the 80-column
limit.
This behavior has been pretty universally panned by Postgres developers.
Hence, disable it with indent's new -lpl switch, so that parenthesized
lines are always lined up with the preceding left paren.
This patch is much less interesting than the first round of indent
changes, but also bulkier, so I thought it best to separate the effects.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1dAmxK-0006EE-1r@gemulon.postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/30527.1495162840@sss.pgh.pa.us
Change pg_bsd_indent to follow upstream rules for placement of comments
to the right of code, and remove pgindent hack that caused comments
following #endif to not obey the general rule.
Commit e3860ffa4dd0dad0dd9eea4be9cc1412373a8c89 wasn't actually using
the published version of pg_bsd_indent, but a hacked-up version that
tried to minimize the amount of movement of comments to the right of
code. The situation of interest is where such a comment has to be
moved to the right of its default placement at column 33 because there's
code there. BSD indent has always moved right in units of tab stops
in such cases --- but in the previous incarnation, indent was working
in 8-space tab stops, while now it knows we use 4-space tabs. So the
net result is that in about half the cases, such comments are placed
one tab stop left of before. This is better all around: it leaves
more room on the line for comment text, and it means that in such
cases the comment uniformly starts at the next 4-space tab stop after
the code, rather than sometimes one and sometimes two tabs after.
Also, ensure that comments following #endif are indented the same
as comments following other preprocessor commands such as #else.
That inconsistency turns out to have been self-inflicted damage
from a poorly-thought-through post-indent "fixup" in pgindent.
This patch is much less interesting than the first round of indent
changes, but also bulkier, so I thought it best to separate the effects.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1dAmxK-0006EE-1r@gemulon.postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/30527.1495162840@sss.pgh.pa.us
The old coding was getting more complicated as new things were added,
and it would be barely tolerable with upcoming WARM updates and other
future features such as indirect indexes. The new coding incurs a small
performance cost in synthetic benchmark cases, and is barely measurable
in normal cases. A much larger benefit is expected from WARM, which
could actually bolt its needs on top of the existing coding, but it is
much uglier and bug-prone than doing it on this new code. Additional
optimization can be applied on top of this, if need be.
Reviewed-by: Pavan Deolasee, Amit Kapila, Mithun CY
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20161228232018.4hc66ndrzpz4g4wn@alvherre.pgsqlhttps://postgr.es/m/CABOikdMJfz69dBNRTOZcB6s5A0tf8OMCyQVYQyR-WFFdoEwKMQ@mail.gmail.com
A hot standby replica keeps a list of Access Exclusive locks for a top
level transaction. These locks are released when the top level transaction
ends. Searching of this list is O(N^2), and each transaction had to pay the
price of searching this list for locks, even if it didn't take any AE
locks itself.
This patch optimizes this case by having the master server track which
transactions took AE locks, and passes that along to the standby server in
the commit/abort record. This allows the standby to only try to release
locks for transactions which actually took any, avoiding the majority of
the performance issue.
Refactor MyXactAccessedTempRel into MyXactFlags to allow minimal additional
cruft with this.
Analysis and initial patch by David Rowley
Author: David Rowley and Simon Riggs
The index is scanned by a single process, but then all cooperating
processes can iterate jointly over the resulting set of heap blocks.
In the future, we might also want to support using a parallel bitmap
index scan to set up for a parallel bitmap heap scan, but that's a
job for another day.
Dilip Kumar, with some corrections and cosmetic changes by me. The
larger patch set of which this is a part has been reviewed and tested
by (at least) Andres Freund, Amit Khandekar, Tushar Ahuja, Rafia
Sabih, Haribabu Kommi, Thomas Munro, and me.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAFiTN-uc4=0WxRGfCzs-xfkMYcSEWUC-Fon6thkJGjkh9i=13A@mail.gmail.com
When the new GUC wal_consistency_checking is set to a non-empty value,
it triggers recording of additional full-page images, which are
compared on the standby against the results of applying the WAL record
(without regard to those full-page images). Allowable differences
such as hints are masked out, and the resulting pages are compared;
any difference results in a FATAL error on the standby.
Kuntal Ghosh, based on earlier patches by Michael Paquier and Heikki
Linnakangas. Extensively reviewed and revised by Michael Paquier and
by me, with additional reviews and comments from Amit Kapila, Álvaro
Herrera, Simon Riggs, and Peter Eisentraut.
Some background activity (like checkpoints, archive timeout, standby
snapshots) is not supposed to happen on an idle system. Unfortunately
so far it was not easy to determine when a system is idle, which
defeated some of the attempts to avoid redundant activity on an idle
system.
To make that easier, allow to make individual WAL insertions as not
being "important". By checking whether any important activity happened
since the last time an activity was performed, it now is easy to check
whether some action needs to be repeated.
Use the new facility for checkpoints, archive timeout and standby
snapshots.
The lack of a facility causes some issues in older releases, but in my
opinion the consequences (superflous checkpoints / archived segments)
aren't grave enough to warrant backpatching.
Author: Michael Paquier, editorialized by Andres Freund
Reviewed-By: Andres Freund, David Steele, Amit Kapila, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Bug: #13685
Discussion:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20151016203031.3019.72930@wrigleys.postgresql.orghttps://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqQcPqxEM3S735Bd2RzApNqSNJVietAC=6kfkYv_45dKwA@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: -
When heap_lock_tuple decides to follow the update chain, it tried to
also lock any version of the tuple that was created by an update that
was subsequently rolled back. This is pointless, since for all intents
and purposes that tuple exists no more; and moreover it causes
misbehavior, as reported independently by Marko Tiikkaja and Marti
Raudsepp: some SELECT FOR UPDATE/SHARE queries may fail to return
the tuples, and assertion-enabled builds crash.
Fix by having heap_lock_updated_tuple test the xmin and return success
immediately if the tuple was created by an aborted transaction.
The condition where tuples become invisible occurs when an updated tuple
chain is followed by heap_lock_updated_tuple, which reports the problem
as HeapTupleSelfUpdated to its caller heap_lock_tuple, which in turn
propagates that code outwards possibly leading the calling code
(ExecLockRows) to believe that the tuple exists no longer.
Backpatch to 9.3. Only on 9.5 and newer this leads to a visible
failure, because of commit 27846f02c176; before that, heap_lock_tuple
skips the whole dance when the tuple is already locked by the same
transaction, because of the ancient HeapTupleSatisfiesUpdate behavior.
Still, the buggy condition may also exist in more convoluted scenarios
involving concurrent transactions, so it seems safer to fix the bug in
the old branches too.
Discussion:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABRT9RC81YUf1=jsmWopcKJEro=VoeG2ou6sPwyOUTx_qteRsg@mail.gmail.comhttps://www.postgresql.org/message-id/48d3eade-98d3-8b9a-477e-1a8dc32a724d@joh.to
When there is an identifiable REPLICA IDENTITY index on the target table,
heap_update leaks the id_attrs bitmapset. That's not many bytes, but it
adds up over enough rows, since the code typically runs in a query-lifespan
context. Bug introduced in commit e55704d8b, which did a rather poor job
of cloning the existing use-pattern for RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap().
Per bug #14293 from Zhou Digoal. Back-patch to 9.4 where the bug was
introduced.
Report: <20160824114320.15676.45171@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
INSERT .. ON CONFLICT runs a pre-check of the possible conflicting
constraints before performing the actual speculative insertion. In case
the inserted tuple included TOASTed columns the ON CONFLICT condition
would be handled correctly in case the conflict was caught by the
pre-check, but if two transactions entered the speculative insertion
phase at the same time, one would have to re-try, and the code for
aborting a speculative insertion did not handle deleting the
speculatively inserted TOAST datums correctly.
TOAST deletion would fail with "ERROR: attempted to delete invisible
tuple" as we attempted to remove the TOAST tuples using
simple_heap_delete which reasoned that the given tuples should not be
visible to the command that wrote them.
This commit updates the heap_abort_speculative() function which aborts
the conflicting tuple to use itself, via toast_delete, for deleting
associated TOAST datums. Like before, the inserted toast rows are not
marked as being speculative.
This commit also adds a isolationtester spec test, exercising the
relevant code path. Unfortunately 9.5 cannot handle two waiting
sessions, and thus cannot execute this test.
Reported-By: Viren Negi, Oskari Saarenmaa
Author: Oskari Saarenmaa, edited a bit by me
Bug: #14150
Discussion: <20160519123338.12513.20271@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
Backpatch: 9.5, where ON CONFLICT was introduced
As mentioned in its commit message, eca0f1db left open a race condition,
where a page could be marked all-visible, after the code checked
PageIsAllVisible() to pin the VM, but before the page is locked. Plug
that hole.
Reviewed-By: Robert Haas, Andres Freund
Author: Amit Kapila
Discussion: CAEepm=3fWAbWryVW9swHyLTY4sXVf0xbLvXqOwUoDiNCx9mBjQ@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: -
Since a892234 & fd31cd265 the visibilitymap's freeze bit is used to
avoid vacuuming the whole relation in anti-wraparound vacuums. Doing so
correctly relies on not adding xids to the heap without also unsetting
the visibilitymap flag. Tuple locking related code has not done so.
To allow selectively resetting all-frozen - to avoid pessimizing
heap_lock_tuple - allow to selectively reset the all-frozen with
visibilitymap_clear(). To avoid having to use
visibilitymap_get_status (e.g. via VM_ALL_FROZEN) inside a critical
section, have visibilitymap_clear() return whether any bits have been
reset.
There's a remaining issue (denoted by XXX): After the PageIsAllVisible()
check in heap_lock_tuple() and heap_lock_updated_tuple_rec() the page
status could theoretically change. Practically that currently seems
impossible, because updaters will hold a page level pin already. Due to
the next beta coming up, it seems better to get the required WAL magic
bump done before resolving this issue.
The added flags field fields to xl_heap_lock and xl_heap_lock_updated
require bumping the WAL magic. Since there's already been a catversion
bump since the last beta, that's not an issue.
Reviewed-By: Robert Haas, Amit Kapila and Andres Freund
Author: Masahiko Sawada, heavily revised by Andres Freund
Discussion: CAEepm=3fWAbWryVW9swHyLTY4sXVf0xbLvXqOwUoDiNCx9mBjQ@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: -
When heap_update needs to look for a page for the new tuple version,
because the current one doesn't have sufficient free space, or when
columns have to be processed by the tuple toaster, it has to release the
lock on the old page during that. Otherwise there'd be lock ordering and
lock nesting issues.
To avoid concurrent sessions from trying to update / delete / lock the
tuple while the page's content lock is released, the tuple's xmax is set
to the current session's xid.
That unfortunately was done without any WAL logging, thereby violating
the rule that no XIDs may appear on disk, without an according WAL
record. If the database were to crash / fail over when the page level
lock is released, and some activity lead to the page being written out
to disk, the xid could end up being reused; potentially leading to the
row becoming invisible.
There might be additional risks by not having t_ctid point at the tuple
itself, without having set the appropriate lock infomask fields.
To fix, compute the appropriate xmax/infomask combination for locking
the tuple, and perform WAL logging using the existing XLOG_HEAP_LOCK
record. That allows the fix to be backpatched.
This issue has existed for a long time. There appears to have been
partial attempts at preventing dangers, but these never have fully been
implemented, and were removed a long time ago, in
11919160 (cf. HEAP_XMAX_UNLOGGED).
In master / 9.6, there's an additional issue, namely that the
visibilitymap's freeze bit isn't reset at that point yet. Since that's a
new issue, introduced only in a892234f830, that'll be fixed in a
separate commit.
Author: Masahiko Sawada and Andres Freund
Reported-By: Different aspects by Thomas Munro, Noah Misch, and others
Discussion: CAEepm=3fWAbWryVW9swHyLTY4sXVf0xbLvXqOwUoDiNCx9mBjQ@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 9.1/all supported versions
0ac5ad5 started to compress infomask bits in WAL records. Unfortunately
the replay routines for XLOG_HEAP_LOCK/XLOG_HEAP2_LOCK_UPDATED forgot to
reset the HEAP_XMAX_INVALID (and some other) hint bits.
Luckily that's not problematic in the majority of cases, because after a
crash/on a standby row locks aren't meaningful. Unfortunately that does
not hold true in the presence of prepared transactions. This means that
after a crash, or after promotion, row level locks held by a prepared,
but not yet committed, prepared transaction might not be enforced.
Discussion: 20160715192319.ubfuzim4zv3rqnxv@alap3.anarazel.de
Backpatch: 9.3, the oldest branch on which 0ac5ad5 is present.
When key-share locking a tuple that has been not-key-updated, and the
update is a committed transaction, in some cases we raised
serializability errors:
ERROR: could not serialize access due to concurrent update
Because the key-share doesn't conflict with the update, the error is
unnecessary and inconsistent with the case that the update hasn't
committed yet. This causes problems for some usage patterns, even if it
can be claimed that it's sufficient to retry the aborted transaction:
given a steady stream of updating transactions and a long locking
transaction, the long transaction can be starved indefinitely despite
multiple retries.
To fix, we recognize that HeapTupleSatisfiesUpdate can return
HeapTupleUpdated when an updating transaction has committed, and that we
need to deal with that case exactly as if it were a non-committed
update: verify whether the two operations conflict, and if not, carry on
normally. If they do conflict, however, there is a difference: in the
HeapTupleBeingUpdated case we can just sleep until the concurrent
transaction is gone, while in the HeapTupleUpdated case this is not
possible and we must raise an error instead.
Per trouble report from Olivier Dony.
In addition to a couple of test cases that verify the changed behavior,
I added a test case to verify the behavior that remains unchanged,
namely that errors are raised when a update that modifies the key is
used. That must still generate serializability errors. One
pre-existing test case changes behavior; per discussion, the new
behavior is actually the desired one.
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/560AA479.4080807@odoo.comhttps://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20151014164844.3019.25750@wrigleys.postgresql.org
Backpatch to 9.3, where the problem appeared.
After pg_upgrade, it is possible that some tuples' Xmax have multixacts
corresponding to the old installation; such multixacts cannot have
running members anymore. In many code sites we already know not to read
them and clobber them silently, but at least when VACUUM tries to freeze
a multixact or determine whether one needs freezing, there's an attempt
to resolve it to its member transactions by calling GetMultiXactIdMembers,
and if the multixact value is "in the future" with regards to the
current valid multixact range, an error like this is raised:
ERROR: MultiXactId 123 has not been created yet -- apparent wraparound
and vacuuming fails. Per discussion with Andrew Gierth, it is completely
bogus to try to resolve multixacts coming from before a pg_upgrade,
regardless of where they stand with regards to the current valid
multixact range.
It's possible to get from under this problem by doing SELECT FOR UPDATE
of the problem tuples, but if tables are large, this is slow and
tedious, so a more thorough solution is desirable.
To fix, we realize that multixacts in xmax created in 9.2 and previous
have a specific bit pattern that is never used in 9.3 and later (we
already knew this, per comments and infomask tests sprinkled in various
places, but we weren't leveraging this knowledge appropriately).
Whenever the infomask of the tuple matches that bit pattern, we just
ignore the multixact completely as if Xmax wasn't set; or, in the case
of tuple freezing, we act as if an unwanted value is set and clobber it
without decoding. This guarantees that no errors will be raised, and
that the values will be progressively removed until all tables are
clean. Most callers of GetMultiXactIdMembers are patched to recognize
directly that the value is a removable "empty" multixact and avoid
calling GetMultiXactIdMembers altogether.
To avoid changing the signature of GetMultiXactIdMembers() in back
branches, we keep the "allow_old" boolean flag but rename it to
"from_pgupgrade"; if the flag is true, we always return an empty set
instead of looking up the multixact. (I suppose we could remove the
argument in the master branch, but I chose not to do so in this commit).
This was broken all along, but the error-facing message appeared first
because of commit 8e9a16ab8f7f and was partially fixed in a25c2b7c4db3.
This fix, backpatched all the way back to 9.3, goes approximately in the
same direction as a25c2b7c4db3 but should cover all cases.
Bug analysis by Andrew Gierth and Álvaro Herrera.
A number of public reports match this bug:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20140330040029.GY4582@tamriel.snowman.nethttps://www.postgresql.org/message-id/538F3D70.6080902@publicrelay.comhttps://www.postgresql.org/message-id/556439CF.7070109@pscs.co.ukhttps://www.postgresql.org/message-id/SG2PR06MB0760098A111C88E31BD4D96FB3540@SG2PR06MB0760.apcprd06.prod.outlook.comhttps://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160615203829.5798.4594@wrigleys.postgresql.org
