Mop up assorted set-but-not-used warnings in the back branches.
This includes back-patching relevant fixes from commit 152c9f7b8
the rest of the way, but there are also several cases that did not
appear in HEAD. Some of those we'd fixed in a retail way but not
back-patched, and others I think just got rewritten out of existence
during nearby refactoring.
While here, also back-patch b1980f6d0 (PL/Tcl: Fix compiler warnings
with Tcl 8.6) into 9.2, so that that branch compiles warning-free
with modern Tcl.
Per project policy, this is a candidate for back-patching into
out-of-support branches: it suppresses annoying compiler warnings
but changes no behavior. Hence, back-patch all the way to 9.2.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/514615.1663615243@sss.pgh.pa.us
In branches before commit 4be058fe9, we have to prevent flattening
of subqueries with empty jointrees if the subqueries' output
columns might need to be wrapped in PlaceHolderVars. That's
because the empty jointree would result in empty phrels for the
PlaceHolderVars, meaning we'd be unable to figure out where to
evaluate them. However, we've failed to keep is_simple_subquery's
check for this hazard in sync with what pull_up_simple_subquery
actually does. The former is checking "lowest_outer_join != NULL",
whereas the conditions pull_up_simple_subquery actually uses are
if (lowest_nulling_outer_join != NULL)
if (containing_appendrel != NULL)
if (parse->groupingSets)
So the outer-join test is overly conservative, while we missed out
checking for appendrels and groupingSets. The appendrel omission
is harmless, because in that case we also check is_safe_append_member
which will also reject such subqueries. The groupingSets omission
is a bug though, leading to assertion failures or planner errors
such as "variable not found in subplan target lists".
is_simple_subquery has access to none of the three variables used
in the correct tests, but its callers do, so I chose to have them
pass down a bool corresponding to the OR of these conditions.
(The need for duplicative conditions would be a maintenance
hazard in actively-developed code, but I'm not too concerned
about it in branches that have only ~ 1 year to live.)
Per bug #17614 from Wei Wei. Patch v10 and v11 only, since we have a
better answer to this in v12 and later (indeed, the faulty check in
is_simple_subquery is gone entirely).
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17614-8ec20c85bdecaa2a@postgresql.org
Some more things I didn't think about in commits 3f7323cbb et al:
MULTIEXPR_SUBLINK subplans might have been converted to initplans
instead of regular subplans, in which case they won't show up in
the modified targetlist. Fortunately, this would only happen if
they have no input parameters, which means that the problem we
originally needed to fix can't happen with them. Therefore, there's
no need to clone their output parameters, and thus it doesn't hurt
that we'll fail to see them in the first pass over the targetlist.
Nonetheless, this complicates matters greatly, because now we have
to distinguish output Params of initplans (which shouldn't get
renumbered) from those of regular subplans (which should).
This also breaks the simplistic scheme I used of assuming that the
subplans found in the targetlist have consecutive subLinkIds.
We really can't avoid the need to know the subplans' subLinkIds in
this code. To fix that, add subLinkId as the last field of SubPlan.
We can get away with that change in back branches because SubPlan
nodes will never be stored in the catalogs, and there's no ABI
break for external code that might be looking at the existing
fields of SubPlan.
Secondly, rewriteTargetListIU might have rolled up multiple
FieldStores or SubscriptingRefs into one targetlist entry,
breaking the assumption that there's at most one Param to fix
per targetlist entry. (That assumption is OK I think in the
ruleutils.c code I stole the logic from in 18f51083c, because
that only deals with pre-rewrite query trees. But it's
definitely not OK here.) Abandon that shortcut and just do a
full tree walk on the targetlist to ensure we find all the
Params we have to change.
Per bug #17606 from Andre Lin. As before, only v10-v13 need the
patch.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17606-e5c8ad18d31db96a@postgresql.org
Commits 3f7323cbb et al missed the possibility that the Params
they are looking for could be buried under implicit coercions,
as well as other stuff that processIndirection() could add to
the original targetlist entry. Copy the code in ruleutils.c
that deals with such cases. (I thought about refactoring so
that there's just one copy; but seeing that we only need this
in old back branches, it seems not worth the trouble.)
Per off-list report from Andre Lin. As before, only v10-v13
need the patch.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17596-c5357f61427a81dc@postgresql.org
Prior to v14, if we have a MULTIEXPR SubPlan (that is, use of the syntax
UPDATE ... SET (c1, ...) = (SELECT ...)) in an UPDATE with an inherited
or partitioned target table, inheritance_planner() will clone the
targetlist and therefore also the MULTIEXPR SubPlan and the Param nodes
referencing it for each child target table. Up to now, we've allowed
all the clones to share the underlying subplan as well as the output
parameter IDs -- that is, the runtime ParamExecData slots. That
technique is borrowed from the far older code that supports initplans,
and it works okay in that case because the cloned SubPlan nodes are
essentially identical. So it doesn't matter which one of the clones
the shared ParamExecData.execPlan field might point to.
However, this fails to hold for MULTIEXPR SubPlans, because they can
have nonempty "args" lists (values to be passed into the subplan), and
those lists could get mutated to different states in the various clones.
In the submitted reproducer, as well as the test case added here, one
clone contains Vars with varno OUTER_VAR where another has INNER_VAR,
because the child tables are respectively on the outer or inner side of
the join. Sharing the execPlan pointer can result in trying to evaluate
an args list that doesn't match the local execution state, with mayhem
ensuing. The result often is to trigger consistency checks in the
executor, but I believe this could end in a crash or incorrect updates.
To fix, assign new Param IDs to each of the cloned SubPlans, so that
they don't share ParamExecData slots at runtime. It still seems fine
for the clones to share the underlying subplan, and extra ParamExecData
slots are cheap enough that this fix shouldn't cost much.
This has been busted since we invented MULTIEXPR SubPlans in 9.5.
Probably the lack of previous reports is because query plans in which
the different clones of a MULTIEXPR mutate to effectively-different
states are pretty rare. There's no issue in v14 and later, because
without inheritance_planner() there's never a reason to clone
MULTIEXPR SubPlans.
Per bug #17596 from Andre Lin. Patch v10-v13 only.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17596-c5357f61427a81dc@postgresql.org
This follows in the footsteps of commit 2591ee8ec by removing one more
ill-advised shortcut from planning of GroupingFuncs. It's true that
we don't intend to execute the argument expression(s) at runtime, but
we still have to process any Vars appearing within them, or we risk
failure at setrefs.c time (or more fundamentally, in EXPLAIN trying
to print such an expression). Vars in upper plan nodes have to have
referents in the next plan level, whether we ever execute 'em or not.
Per bug #17479 from Michael J. Sullivan. Back-patch to all supported
branches.
Richard Guo
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17479-6260deceaf0ad304@postgresql.org
The planner needs to treat GroupingFunc like Aggref for many purposes,
in particular with respect to processing of the argument expressions,
which are not to be evaluated at runtime. A few places hadn't gotten
that memo, notably including subselect.c's processing of outer-level
aggregates. This resulted in assertion failures or wrong plans for
cases in which a GROUPING() construct references an outer aggregation
level.
Also fix missing special cases for GroupingFunc in cost_qual_eval
(resulting in wrong cost estimates for GROUPING(), although it's
not clear that that would affect plan shapes in practice) and in
ruleutils.c (resulting in excess parentheses in pretty-print mode).
Per bug #17088 from Yaoguang Chen. Back-patch to all supported
branches.
Richard Guo, Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17088-e33882b387de7f5c@postgresql.org
createplan.c tries to save a runtime projection step by specifying
a scan plan node's output as being exactly the table's columns, or
index's columns in the case of an index-only scan, if there is not a
reason to do otherwise. This logic did not previously pay attention
to whether an index's columns are returnable. That worked, sort of
accidentally, until commit 9a3ddeb51 taught setrefs.c to reject plans
that try to read a non-returnable column. I have no desire to loosen
setrefs.c's new check, so instead adjust use_physical_tlist() to not
try to optimize this way when there are non-returnable column(s).
Per report from Ryan Kelly. Like the previous patch, back-patch
to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAHUie24ddN+pDNw7fkhNrjrwAX=fXXfGZZEHhRuofV_N_ftaSg@mail.gmail.com
In the normal configuration where GEQO_DEBUG isn't defined,
recent clang versions have started to complain that geqo_main.c
accumulates the edge_failures count but never does anything
with it. As a minimal back-patchable fix, insert a void cast
to silence this warning. (I'd speculated about ripping out the
GEQO_DEBUG logic altogether, but I don't think we'd wish to
back-patch that.)
Per recently-established project policy, this is a candidate
for back-patching into out-of-support branches: it suppresses
an annoying compiler warning but changes no behavior. Hence,
back-patch all the way to 9.2.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+hUKGLTSZQwES8VNPmWO9AO0wSeLt36OCPDAZTccT1h7Q7kTQ@mail.gmail.com
In sort_inner_and_outer we iterate a list of PathKey elements, but the
variable is declared as (List *). This mistake is benign, because we
only pass the pointer to lcons() and never dereference it.
This exists since ~2004, but it's confusing. So fix and backpatch to all
supported branches.
Backpatch-through: 10
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/bf3a6ea1-a7d8-7211-0669-189d5c169374%40enterprisedb.com
Commit 4ace45677 failed to fix the problem fully, because the
same issue of attempting to fetch a non-returnable index column
can occur when rechecking the indexqual after using a lossy index
operator. Moreover, it broke EXPLAIN for such indexquals (which
indicates a gap in our test cases :-().
Revert the code changes of 4ace45677 in favor of adding a new field
to struct IndexOnlyScan, containing a version of the indexqual that
can be executed against the index-returned tuple without using any
non-returnable columns. (The restrictions imposed by check_index_only
guarantee this is possible, although we may have to recompute indexed
expressions.) Support construction of that during setrefs.c
processing by marking IndexOnlyScan.indextlist entries as resjunk
if they can't be returned, rather than removing them entirely.
(We could alternatively require setrefs.c to look up the IndexOptInfo
again, but abusing resjunk this way seems like a reasonably safe way
to avoid needing to do that.)
This solution isn't great from an API-stability standpoint: if there
are any extensions out there that build IndexOnlyScan structs directly,
they'll be broken in the next minor releases. However, only a very
invasive extension would be likely to do such a thing. There's no
change in the Path representation, so typical planner extensions
shouldn't have a problem.
As before, back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3179992.1641150853@sss.pgh.pa.us
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17350-b5bdcf476e5badbb@postgresql.org
If an index has both returnable and non-returnable columns, and one of
the non-returnable columns is an expression using a Var that is in a
returnable column, then a query returning that expression could result
in an index-only scan plan that attempts to read the non-returnable
column, instead of recomputing the expression from the returnable
column as intended.
To fix, redefine the "indextlist" list of an IndexOnlyScan plan node
as containing null Consts in place of any non-returnable columns.
This solves the problem by preventing setrefs.c from falsely matching
to such entries. The executor is happy since it only cares about the
exposed types of the entries, and ruleutils.c doesn't care because a
correct plan won't reference those entries. I considered some other
ways to prevent setrefs.c from doing the wrong thing, but this way
seems good since (a) it allows a very localized fix, (b) it makes
the indextlist structure more compact in many cases, and (c) the
indextlist is now a more faithful representation of what the index AM
will actually produce, viz. nulls for any non-returnable columns.
This is easier to hit since we introduced included columns, but it's
possible to construct failing examples without that, as per the
added regression test. Hence, back-patch to all supported branches.
Per bug #17350 from Louis Jachiet.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17350-b5bdcf476e5badbb@postgresql.org
create_projection_plan contains a hidden assumption (here made
explicit by an Assert) that a projection-capable Path will yield a
projection-capable Plan. Unfortunately, that assumption is violated
only a few lines away, by create_projection_plan itself. This means
that two stacked ProjectionPaths can yield an outcome where we try to
jam the upper path's tlist into a non-projection-capable child node,
resulting in an invalid plan.
There isn't any good reason to have stacked ProjectionPaths; indeed the
whole concept is faulty, since the set of Vars/Aggs/etc needed by the
upper one wouldn't necessarily be available in the output of the lower
one, nor could the lower one create such values if they weren't
available from its input. Hence, we can fix this by adjusting
create_projection_path to strip any top-level ProjectionPath from the
subpath it's given. (This amounts to saying "oh, we changed our
minds about what we need to project here".)
The test case added here only fails in v13 and HEAD; before that, we
don't attempt to shove the Sort into the parallel part of the plan,
for reasons that aren't entirely clear to me. However, all the
directly-related code looks generally the same as far back as v11,
where the hazard was introduced (by d7c19e62a). So I've got no faith
that the same type of bug doesn't exist in v11 and v12, given the
right test case. Hence, back-patch the code changes, but not the
irrelevant test case, into those branches.
Per report from Bas Poot.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/534fca83789c4a378c7de379e9067d4f@politie.nl
Per buildfarm and local experimentation, bleeding-edge gcc isn't
convinced that the MemSet in reorder_function_arguments() is safe.
Shut it up by adding an explicit check that pronargs isn't negative,
and by changing MemSet to memset. (It appears that either change is
enough to quiet the warning at -O2, but let's do both to be sure.)
array_get_element and array_get_slice qualify as leakproof, since
they will silently return NULL for bogus subscripts. But
array_set_element and array_set_slice throw errors for such cases,
making them clearly not leakproof. contain_leaked_vars was evidently
written with only the former case in mind, as it gave the wrong answer
for assignment SubscriptingRefs (nee ArrayRefs).
This would be a live security bug, were it not that assignment
SubscriptingRefs can only occur in INSERT and UPDATE target lists,
while we only care about leakproofness for qual expressions; so the
wrong answer can't occur in practice. Still, that's a rather shaky
answer for a security-related question; and maybe in future somebody
will want to ask about leakproofness of a tlist. So it seems wise to
fix and even back-patch this correction.
(We would need some change here anyway for the upcoming
generic-subscripting patch, since extensions might make different
tradeoffs about whether to throw errors. Commit 558d77f20 attempted
to lay groundwork for that by asking check_functions_in_node whether a
SubscriptingRef contains leaky functions; but that idea fails now that
the implementation methods of a SubscriptingRef are not SQL-visible
functions that could be marked leakproof or not.)
Back-patch to 9.6. While 9.5 has the same issue, the code's a bit
different. It seems quite unlikely that we'd introduce any actual bug
in the short time 9.5 has left to live, so the work/risk/reward balance
isn't attractive for changing 9.5.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3143742.1607368115@sss.pgh.pa.us
This can't work if there's no postmaster, and indeed the code got an
assertion failure trying. There should be a check on IsUnderPostmaster
gating the use of parallelism, as the planner has for ordinary
parallel queries.
Commit 40d964ec9 got this right, so follow its model of checking
IsUnderPostmaster at the same place where we check for
max_parallel_maintenance_workers == 0. In general, new code
implementing parallel utility operations should do the same.
Report and patch by Yulin Pei, cosmetically adjusted by me.
Back-patch to v11 where this code came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/HK0PR01MB22747D839F77142D7E76A45DF4F50@HK0PR01MB2274.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com
If a PlaceHolderVar is to be evaluated at a join relation, but
its value is only needed there and not at higher levels, we neglected
to update the joinrel's direct_lateral_relids to include the PHV's
source rel. This causes problems because join_is_legal() then won't
allow joining the joinrel to the PHV's source rel at all, leading
to "failed to build any N-way joins" planner failures.
Per report from Andreas Seltenreich. Back-patch to 9.5
where the problem originated.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87blfgqa4t.fsf@aurora.ydns.eu
Previously this code assumed that all IndexScan nodes supported
mark/restore, which is not true since it depends on optional index AM
support functions. This could lead to errors about missing support
functions in rare edge cases of mergejoins with no sort keys, where an
unordered non-btree index scan was placed on the inner path without a
protecting Materialize node. (Normally, the fact that merge join
requires ordered input would avoid this error.)
Backpatch all the way since this bug is ancient.
Per report from Eugen Konkov on irc.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87o8jn50be.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
In the planner, it was possible, given an extreme enough case containing a
large number of joins for the number of estimated rows to become infinite.
This could cause problems in initial_cost_mergejoin() where we perform
some calculations based on those row estimates.
A problem case, presented by Onder Kalaci showed an Assert failure from
an Assert checking outerstartsel <= outerendsel. In his test case this
was effectively NaN <= Inf, which is false. The NaN outerstartsel came
from multiplying the infinite outer_path_rows by 0.0.
In master, this problem was fixed by a90c950fc, however, that fix was too
invasive for the backbranches. Here we just relax the Asserts to allow
them to pass. The worst that appears to happen from this is that we show
NaN cost values and infinite row estimates in EXPLAIN. add_path() would
have had a hard time doing anything useful with such costs, but that does
not really matter as if the row estimates were even close to accurate,
such plan would not complete this side of the heat death of the universe.
Reported-by: Onder Kalaci
Backpatch: 9.5 to 13
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/DM6PR21MB1211FF360183BCA901B27F04D80B0@DM6PR21MB1211.namprd21.prod.outlook.com
get_eclass_for_sort_expr() computes expr_relids and nullable_relids
early on, even though they won't be needed unless we make a new
EquivalenceClass, which we often don't. Aside from the probably-minor
inefficiency, there's a memory management problem: these bitmapsets will
be built in the caller's context, leading to dangling pointers if that
is shorter-lived than root->planner_cxt. This would be a live bug if
get_eclass_for_sort_expr() could be called with create_it = true during
GEQO join planning. So far as I can find, the core code never does
that, but it's hard to be sure that no extensions do, especially since
the comments make it clear that that's supposed to be a supported case.
Fix by not computing these values until we've switched into planner_cxt
to build the new EquivalenceClass.
generate_join_implied_equalities() uses inner_rel->relids to look up
relevant eclasses, but it ought to be using nominal_inner_relids.
This is presently harmless because a child RelOptInfo will always have
exactly the same eclass_indexes as its topmost parent; but that might
not be true forever, and anyway it makes the code confusing.
The first of these is old (introduced by me in f3b3b8d5b), so back-patch
to all supported branches. The second only dates to v13, but we might
as well back-patch it to keep the code looking similar across branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1508010.1601832581@sss.pgh.pa.us
The trouble with doing this is that an apparently-constant subquery
output column isn't really constant if it is a grouping column that
appears in only some of the grouping sets. A qual using such a
column would be subject to incorrect const-folding after push-down,
as seen in bug #16585 from Paul Sivash.
To fix, just disable qual pushdown altogether if the sub-query has
nonempty groupingSets. While we could imagine far less restrictive
solutions, there is not much point in working harder right now,
because subquery_planner() won't move HAVING clauses to WHERE within
such a subquery. If the qual stays in HAVING it's not going to be
a lot more useful than if we'd kept it at the outer level.
Having said that, this restriction could be removed if we used a
parsetree representation that distinguished such outputs from actual
constants, which is something I hope to do in future. Hence, make
the patch a minimal addition rather than integrating it more tightly
(e.g. by renumbering the existing items in subquery_is_pushdown_safe's
comment).
Back-patch to 9.5 where grouping sets were introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16585-9d8c340d23ade8c1@postgresql.org
nodeSubplan.c expects that the testexpr for a hashable ANY SubPlan
has the form of one or more OpExprs whose LHS is an expression of the
outer query's, while the RHS is an expression over Params representing
output columns of the subquery. However, the planner only went as far
as verifying that the clauses were all binary OpExprs. This works
99.99% of the time, because the clauses have the right shape when
emitted by the parser --- but it's possible for function inlining to
break that, as reported by PegoraroF10. To fix, teach the planner
to check that the LHS and RHS contain the right things, or more
accurately don't contain the wrong things. Given that this has been
broken for years without anyone noticing, it seems sufficient to just
give up hashing when it happens, rather than go to the trouble of
commuting the clauses back again (which wouldn't necessarily work
anyway).
While poking at that, I also noticed that nodeSubplan.c had a baked-in
assumption that the number of hash clauses is identical to the number
of subquery output columns. Again, that's fine as far as parser output
goes, but it's not hard to break it via function inlining. There seems
little reason for that assumption though --- AFAICS, the only thing
it's buying us is not having to store the number of hash clauses
explicitly. Adding code to the planner to reject such cases would take
more code than getting nodeSubplan.c to cope, so I fixed it that way.
This has been broken for as long as we've had hashable SubPlans,
so back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1549209182255-0.post@n3.nabble.com
reparameterize_path_by_child() failed to reparameterize BitmapAnd
and BitmapOr paths. This matters only if such a path is chosen as
the inside of a nestloop partition-wise join, where we have to pass
in parameters from the outside of the nestloop. If that did happen,
we generated a bad plan that would likely lead to crashes at execution.
This is not entirely reparameterize_path_by_child()'s fault though;
it's the victim of an ancient decision (my ancient decision, I think)
to not bother filling in param_info in BitmapAnd/Or path nodes. That
caused the function to believe that such nodes and their children
contain no parameter references and so need not be processed.
In hindsight that decision looks pretty penny-wise and pound-foolish:
while it saves a few cycles during path node setup, we do commonly
need the information later. In particular, by reversing the decision
and requiring valid param_info data in all nodes of a bitmap path
tree, we can get rid of indxpath.c's get_bitmap_tree_required_outer()
function, which computed the data on-demand. It's not unlikely that
that nets out as a savings of cycles in many scenarios. A couple
of other things in indxpath.c can be simplified as well.
While here, get rid of some cases in reparameterize_path_by_child()
that are visibly dead or useless, given that we only care about
reparameterizing paths that can be on the inside of a parameterized
nestloop. This case reminds one of the maxim that untested code
probably does not work, so I'm unwilling to leave unreachable code
in this function. (I did leave the T_Gather case in place even
though it's not reached in the regression tests. It's not very
clear to me when the planner might prefer to put Gather below
rather than above a nestloop, but at least in principle the case
might be interesting.)
Per bug #16536, originally from Arne Roland but with a test case
by Andrew Gierth. Back-patch to v11 where this code came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16536-2213ee0b3aad41fd@postgresql.org
The qual pushdown logic assumed that all Vars in a restriction clause
must be Vars referencing subquery outputs; but since we introduced
LATERAL, it's possible for such a Var to be a lateral reference instead.
This led to an assertion failure in debug builds. In a non-debug
build, there might be no ill effects (if qual_is_pushdown_safe decided
the qual was unsafe anyway), or we could get failures later due to
construction of an invalid plan. I've not gone to much length to
characterize the possible failures, but at least segfaults in the
executor have been observed.
Given that this has been busted since 9.3 and it took this long for
anybody to notice, I judge that the case isn't worth going to great
lengths to optimize. Hence, fix by just teaching qual_is_pushdown_safe
that such quals are unsafe to push down, matching the previous behavior
when it accidentally didn't fail.
Per report from Tom Ellis. Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200713175124.GQ8220@cloudinit-builder
After running GetForeignRelSize for a foreign table, adjust rel->tuples
to be at least as large as rel->rows. This prevents bizarre behavior
in estimate_num_groups() and perhaps other places, especially in the
scenario where rel->tuples is zero because pg_class.reltuples is
(suggesting that ANALYZE has never been run for the table). As things
stood, we'd end up estimating one group out of any GROUP BY on such a
table, whereas the default group-count estimate is more likely to result
in a sane plan.
Also, clarify in the documentation that GetForeignRelSize has the option
to override the rel->tuples value if it has a better idea of what to use
than what is in pg_class.reltuples.
Per report from Jeff Janes. Back-patch to all supported branches.
Patch by me; thanks to Etsuro Fujita for review
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMkU=1xNo9cnan+Npxgz0eK7394xmjmKg-QEm8wYG9P5-CcaqQ@mail.gmail.com
Writing a trailing semicolon in a macro is almost never the right thing,
because you almost always want to write a semicolon after each macro
call instead. (Even if there was some reason to prefer not to, pgindent
would probably make a hash of code formatted that way; so within PG the
rule should basically be "don't do it".) Thus, if we have a semi inside
the macro, the compiler sees "something;;". Much of the time the extra
empty statement is harmless, but it could lead to mysterious syntax
errors at call sites. In perhaps an overabundance of neatnik-ism, let's
run around and get rid of the excess semicolons whereever possible.
The only thing worse than a mysterious syntax error is a mysterious
syntax error that only happens in the back branches; therefore,
backpatch these changes where relevant, which is most of them because
most of these mistakes are old. (The lack of reported problems shows
that this is largely a hypothetical issue, but still, it could bite
us in some future patch.)
John Naylor and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CACPNZCs0qWTqJ2QUSGJ07B7uvAvzMb-KbG2q+oo+J3tsWN5cqw@mail.gmail.com
WindowAgg will potentially store large numbers of input rows into
tuplestores to allow access to other rows in the frame. If the input
is coming via an explicit Sort node, then unneeded columns will
already have been discarded (since Sort requests a small tlist); but
there are idioms like COUNT(*) OVER () that result in the input not
being sorted at all, and cases where the input is being sorted by some
means other than a Sort; if we don't request a small tlist, then
WindowAgg's storage requirement is inflated by the unneeded columns.
Backpatch back to 9.6, where the current tlist handling was added.
(Prior to that, WindowAgg would always use a small tlist.)
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/87a7ator8n.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
d4c3a156c added code to remove columns that were not part of a table's
PRIMARY KEY constraint from the GROUP BY clause when all the primary key
columns were present in the group by. This is fine to do since we know
that there will only be one row per group coming from this relation.
However, the logic failed to consider inheritance parent relations. These
can have child relations without a primary key, but even if they did, they
could duplicate one of the parent's rows or one from another child
relation. In this case, those additional GROUP BY columns are required.
Fix this by disabling the optimization for inheritance parent tables.
In v11 and beyond, partitioned tables are fine since partitions cannot
overlap and before v11 partitioned tables could not have a primary key.
Reported-by: Manuel Rigger
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CA+u7OA7VLKf_vEr6kLF3MnWSA9LToJYncgpNX2tQ-oWzYCBQAw@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 9.6
The logic in reorder_grouping_sets to order grouping set elements to
match a pre-specified sort ordering was defective, resulting in
unnecessary sort nodes (though the query output would still be
correct). Repair, simplifying the code a little, and add a test.
Per report from Richard Guo, though I didn't use their patch. Original
bug seems to have been my fault.
Backpatch back to 9.5 where grouping sets were introduced.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAN_9JTzyjGcUjiBHxLsgqfk7PkdLGXiM=pwM+=ph2LsWw0WO1A@mail.gmail.com
WHERE EXISTS (...) queries cannot be executed by Parallel Hash Join
with jointype JOIN_UNIQUE_INNER, because there is no way to make a
partial plan totally unique. The consequence of allowing such plans
was duplicate results from some EXISTS queries.
Back-patch to 11. Bug #15857.
Author: Thomas Munro
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane
Reported-by: Vladimir Kriukov
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15857-d1ba2a64bce0795e%40postgresql.org
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
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.
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
join_is_legal() needs to reject forming certain outer joins in cases
where that would lead the planner down a blind alley. However, it
mistakenly supposed that the way to handle full joins was to treat them
as applying the same constraints as for left joins, only to both sides.
That doesn't work, as shown in bug #15741 from Anthony Skorski: given
a lateral reference out of a join that's fully enclosed by a full join,
the code would fail to believe that any join ordering is legal, resulting
in errors like "failed to build any N-way joins".
However, we don't really need to consider full joins at all for this
purpose, because we effectively force them to be evaluated in syntactic
order, and that order is always legal for lateral references. Hence,
get rid of this broken logic for full joins and just ignore them instead.
This seems to have been an oversight in commit 7e19db0c0.
Back-patch to all supported branches, as that was.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15741-276f1f464b3f40eb@postgresql.org
Before those commits, partitioning-related code in the executor could
assume that ModifyTableState.resultRelInfo[] contains only leaf partitions.
However, now a fully-pruned update results in a dummy ModifyTable that
references the root partitioned table, and that breaks some stuff.
In v11, this led to an assertion or core dump in the tuple routing code.
Fix by disabling tuple routing, since we don't need that anyway.
(I chose to do that in HEAD as well for safety, even though the problem
doesn't manifest in HEAD as it stands.)
In v10, this confused ExecInitModifyTable's decision about whether it
needed to close the root table. But we can get rid of that altogether
by being smarter about where to find the root table.
Note that since the referenced commits haven't shipped yet, this
isn't fixing any bug the field has seen.
Amit Langote, per a report from me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20710.1554582479@sss.pgh.pa.us
While trying to plan a partitionwise join, we may be faced with cases
where one or both input partitions for a particular segment of the join
have been pruned away. In HEAD and v11, this is problematic because
earlier processing didn't bother to make a pruned RelOptInfo fully
valid. With an upcoming patch to make partition pruning more efficient,
this'll be even more problematic because said RelOptInfo won't exist at
all.
The existing code attempts to deal with this by retroactively making the
RelOptInfo fully valid, but that causes crashes under GEQO because join
planning is done in a short-lived memory context. In v11 we could
probably have fixed this by switching to the planner's main context
while fixing up the RelOptInfo, but that idea doesn't scale well to the
upcoming patch. It would be better not to mess with the base-relation
data structures during join planning, anyway --- that's just a recipe
for order-of-operations bugs.
In many cases, though, we don't actually need the child RelOptInfo,
because if the input is certainly empty then the join segment's result
is certainly empty, so we can skip making a join plan altogether. (The
existing code ultimately arrives at the same conclusion, but only after
doing a lot more work.) This approach works except when the pruned-away
partition is on the nullable side of a LEFT, ANTI, or FULL join, and the
other side isn't pruned. But in those cases the existing code leaves a
lot to be desired anyway --- the correct output is just the result of
the unpruned side of the join, but we were emitting a useless outer join
against a dummy Result. Pending somebody writing code to handle that
more nicely, let's just abandon the partitionwise-join optimization in
such cases.
When the modified code skips making a join plan, it doesn't make a
join RelOptInfo either; this requires some upper-level code to
cope with nulls in part_rels[] arrays. We would have had to have
that anyway after the upcoming patch.
Back-patch to v11 since the crash is demonstrable there.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/8305.1553884377@sss.pgh.pa.us
The assertions added by commits 34ea1ab7f et al found another problem:
set_dummy_rel_pathlist and mark_dummy_rel were failing to label
the dummy paths they create with the correct outer_relids, in case
the relation is necessarily parameterized due to having lateral
references in its tlist. It's likely that this has no user-visible
consequences in production builds, at the moment; but still an assertion
failure is a bad thing, so back-patch the fix.
Per bug #15694 from Roman Zharkov (via Alexander Lakhin)
and an independent report by Tushar Ahuja.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15694-74f2ca97e7044f7f@postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/7d72ab20-c725-3ce2-f99d-4e64dd8a0de6@enterprisedb.com
In commit 960df2a971 ("Correctly assess parallel-safety of tlists when
SRFs are used."), the testing of scan/join target was done incorrectly,
which caused a plan-quality problem. Backpatch through to v11 where
the aforementioned commit went in, since this is a regression from v10.
Author: Etsuro Fujita
Reviewed-by: Robert Haas and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/5C75303E.8020303@lab.ntt.co.jp
When we introduced separate ProjectSetPath nodes for application of
set-returning functions in v10, we inadvertently broke some cases where
we're supposed to recognize that the result of a subquery is known to be
empty (contain zero rows). That's because IS_DUMMY_REL was just looking
for a childless AppendPath without allowing for a ProjectSetPath being
possibly stuck on top. In itself, this didn't do anything much worse
than produce slightly worse plans for some corner cases.
Then in v11, commit 11cf92f6e rearranged things to allow the scan/join
targetlist to be applied directly to partial paths before they get
gathered. But it inserted a short-circuit path for dummy relations
that was a little too short: it failed to insert a ProjectSetPath node
at all for a targetlist containing set-returning functions, resulting in
bogus "set-valued function called in context that cannot accept a set"
errors, as reported in bug #15669 from Madelaine Thibaut.
The best way to fix this mess seems to be to reimplement IS_DUMMY_REL
so that it drills down through any ProjectSetPath nodes that might be
there (and it seems like we'd better allow for ProjectionPath as well).
While we're at it, make it look at rel->pathlist not cheapest_total_path,
so that it gives the right answer independently of whether set_cheapest
has been done lately. That dependency looks pretty shaky in the context
of code like apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths, and even if it's not broken
today it'd certainly bite us at some point. (Nastily, unsafe use of the
old coding would almost always work; the hazard comes down to possibly
looking through a dangling pointer, and only once in a blue moon would
you find something there that resulted in the wrong answer.)
It now looks like it was a mistake for IS_DUMMY_REL to be a macro: if
there are any extensions using it, they'll continue to use the old
inadequate logic until they're recompiled, after which they'll fail
to load into server versions predating this fix. Hopefully there are
few such extensions.
Having fixed IS_DUMMY_REL, the special path for dummy rels in
apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths is unnecessary as well as being wrong,
so we can just drop it.
Also change a few places that were testing for partitioned-ness of a
planner relation but not using IS_PARTITIONED_REL for the purpose; that
seems unsafe as well as inconsistent, plus it required an ugly hack in
apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths.
In passing, save a few cycles in apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths by
skipping processing of pre-existing paths for partitioned rels,
and do some cosmetic cleanup and comment adjustment in that function.
I renamed IS_DUMMY_PATH to IS_DUMMY_APPEND with the intention of breaking
any code that might be using it, since in almost every case that would
be wrong; IS_DUMMY_REL is what to be using instead.
In HEAD, also make set_dummy_rel_pathlist static (since it's no longer
used from outside allpaths.c), and delete is_dummy_plan, since it's no
longer used anywhere.
Back-patch as appropriate into v11 and v10.
Tom Lane and Julien Rouhaud
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15669-02fb3296cca26203@postgresql.org
In the case where inheritance_planner() finds that every table has
been excluded by constraints, it thought it could get away with
making a plan consisting of just a dummy Result node. While certainly
there's no updating or deleting to be done, this had two user-visible
problems: the plan did not report the correct set of output columns
when a RETURNING clause was present, and if there were any
statement-level triggers that should be fired, it didn't fire them.
Hence, rather than only generating the dummy Result, we need to
stick a valid ModifyTable node on top, which requires a tad more
effort here.
It's been broken this way for as long as inheritance_planner() has
known about deleting excluded subplans at all (cf commit 635d42e9c),
so back-patch to all supported branches.
Amit Langote and Tom Lane, per a report from Petr Fedorov.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/5da6f0f0-1364-1876-6978-907678f89a3e@phystech.edu
Check ec_relids before bothering to iterate through the EC members.
On a perhaps extreme, but still real-world, query in which
match_eclasses_to_foreign_key_col() accounts for the bulk of the
planner's runtime, this saves nearly 40% of the runtime. It's a bit
of a stopgap fix, but it's simple enough to be back-patched to 9.6
where this code came in; so let's do that.
David Rowley
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/6970.1545327857@sss.pgh.pa.us
The recursion in contain_nonstrict_functions_walker() was done wrong,
causing the strictness check to be bypassed for a parse node that
is the immediate input of an ArrayCoerceExpr node. This could allow,
for example, incorrect decisions about whether a strict SQL function
can be inlined.
I didn't add a regression test, because (a) the bug is so narrow
and (b) I couldn't think of a test case that wasn't dependent on a
large number of other behaviors, to the point where it would likely
soon rot to the point of not testing what it was intended to.
I broke this in commit c12d570fa, so back-patch to v11.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/27571.1550617881@sss.pgh.pa.us
We're only going to consider key columns when creating indexquals,
so there is no point in having the outer loops in indxpath.c iterate
further than nkeycolumns.
Doing so in match_pathkeys_to_index() is actually wrong, and would have
caused crashes by now, except that we have no index AMs supporting both
amcanorderbyop and amcaninclude.
It's also wrong in relation_has_unique_index_for(). The effect there is
to fail to prove uniqueness even when the index does prove it, if there
are extra columns.
Also future-proof examine_variable() for the day when extra columns can
be expressions, and fix what's either a thinko or just an oversight in
btcostestimate(): we should consider the number of key columns, not the
total, when deciding whether to derate correlation.
None of these things seemed important enough to risk changing in a
just-before-wrap patch, but since we're past the release wrap window,
time to fix 'em.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/25526.1549847928@sss.pgh.pa.us
indxpath.c needs a good deal more attention for covering indexes than
it's gotten. But so far as I can tell, the only really awful breakage
is in expand_indexqual_rowcompare (nee adjust_rowcompare_for_index),
which was only half fixed in c266ed31a. The other problems aren't
bad enough to take the risk of a just-before-wrap fix.
The problem here is that if the leading column of a row comparison
matches an index (allowing this code to be reached), and some later
column doesn't match the index, it'll nonetheless believe that that
column matches the first included index column. Typically that'll
lead to an error like "operator M is not a member of opfamily N" as
a result of fetching a garbage opfamily OID. But with enough bad
luck, maybe a broken plan would be generated.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/25526.1549847928@sss.pgh.pa.us
The previous ordering of these steps satisfied the nominal requirement
that set_rel_pathlist_hook could editorialize on the whole set of Paths
constructed for a base relation. In practice, though, trying to change
the set of partial paths was impossible. Adding one didn't work because
(a) it was too late to be included in Gather paths made by the core code,
and (b) calling add_partial_path after generate_gather_paths is unsafe,
because it might try to delete a path it thinks is dominated, but that
is already embedded in some Gather path(s). Nor could the hook safely
remove partial paths, for the same reason that they might already be
embedded in Gathers.
Better to call extensions first, let them add partial paths as desired,
and then gather. In v11 and up, we already doubled down on that ordering
by postponing gathering even further for single-relation queries; so even
if the hook wished to editorialize on Gather path construction, it could
not.
Report and patch by KaiGai Kohei. Back-patch to 9.6 where Gather paths
were added.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAOP8fzahwpKJRTVVTqo2AE=mDTz_efVzV6Get_0=U3SO+-ha1A@mail.gmail.com
As reported in bug #15613 from Srinivasan S A, file_fdw and postgres_fdw
neglected to mark plain baserel foreign paths as parameterized when the
relation has lateral_relids. Other FDWs have surely copied this mistake,
so rather than just patching those two modules, install a band-aid fix
in create_foreignscan_path to rectify the mistake centrally.
Although the band-aid is enough to fix the visible symptom, correct
the calls in file_fdw and postgres_fdw anyway, so that they are valid
examples for external FDWs.
Also, since the band-aid isn't enough to make this work for parameterized
foreign joins, throw an elog(ERROR) if such a case is passed to
create_foreignscan_path. This shouldn't pose much of a problem for
existing external FDWs, since it's likely they aren't trying to make such
paths anyway (though some of them may need a defense against joins with
lateral_relids, similar to the one this patch installs into postgres_fdw).
Add some assertions in relnode.c to catch future occurrences of the same
error --- in particular, as backstop against core-code mistakes like the
one fixed by commit bdd9a99aa.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15613-092be1be9576c728@postgresql.org
create_lateral_join_info() computes a bunch of information about lateral
references between base relations, and then attempts to propagate those
markings to appendrel children of the original base relations. But the
original coding neglected the possibility of indirect descendants
(grandchildren etc). During v11 development we noticed that this was
wrong for partitioned-table cases, but failed to realize that it was just
as wrong for any appendrel. While the case can't arise for appendrels
derived from traditional table inheritance (because we make a flat
appendrel for that), nested appendrels can arise from nested UNION ALL
subqueries. Failure to mark the lower-level relations as having lateral
references leads to confusion in add_paths_to_append_rel about whether
unparameterized paths can be built. It's not very clear whether that
leads to any user-visible misbehavior; the lack of field reports suggests
that it may cause nothing worse than minor cost misestimation. Still,
it's a bug, and it leads to failures of Asserts that I intend to add
later.
To fix, we need to propagate information from all appendrel parents,
not just those that are RELOPT_BASERELs. We can still do it in one
pass, if we rely on the append_rel_list to be ordered with ancestor
relationships before descendant ones; add assertions checking that.
While fixing this, we can make a small performance improvement by
traversing the append_rel_list just once instead of separately for
each appendrel parent relation.
Noted while investigating bug #15613, though this patch does not fix
that (which is why I'm not committing the related Asserts yet).
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3951.1549403812@sss.pgh.pa.us
Previously, in set_append_rel_size(), we generated tlists and EC members
for dummy children for possible use by partition-wise join, even if
partition-wise join was disabled or the top parent was not a partitioned
table, but adding such EC members causes noticeable planning speed
degradation for queries with certain kinds of join quals like
"(foo.x + bar.y) = constant" where foo and bar are partitioned tables in
cases where there are lots of dummy children, as the EC members lists
grow huge, especially for the ECs derived from such join quals, which
makes the search for the parent EC members in add_child_rel_equivalences()
very time-consuming. Postpone the work until such children are actually
involved in a partition-wise join.
Reported-by: Sanyo Capobiango
Analyzed-by: Justin Pryzby and Alvaro Herrera
Author: Amit Langote, with a few additional changes by me
Reviewed-by: Ashutosh Bapat
Backpatch-through: v11 where partition-wise join was added
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAO698qZnrxoZu7MEtfiJmpmUtz3AVYFVnwzR%2BpqjF%3DrmKBTgpw%40mail.gmail.com
