Postgres has traditionally considered the syntactic forms f(x) and x.f
to be equivalent, allowing tricks such as writing a function and then
using it as though it were a computed-on-demand column. However, our
behavior when both interpretations are feasible left something to be
desired: we always chose the column interpretation. This could lead
to very surprising results, as in a recent bug report from Neil Conway.
It also created a dump-and-reload hazard, since what was a function
call in a dumped view could get interpreted as a column reference
at reload, if a matching column name had been added to the underlying
table since the view was created.
What seems better, in ambiguous situations, is to prefer the choice
matching the syntactic form of the reference. This seems much less
astonishing in general, and it fixes the dump/reload hazard.
Although this could be called a bug fix, there have been few complaints
and there's some small risk of breaking applications that depend on the
old behavior, so no back-patch. It does seem reasonable to slip it
into v11, though.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAOW5sYa3Wp7KozCuzjOdw6PiOYPi6D=VvRybtH2S=2C0SVmRmA@mail.gmail.com
On Windows, it is sometimes important for corresponding malloc() and
free() calls to be made from the same DLL, since some build options can
result in multiple allocators being active at the same time. For that
reason we already provided PQfreemem(). This commit adds a similar
function for freeing string results allocated by the pgtypes library.
Author: Takayuki Tsunakawa
Reviewed-by: Kyotaro Horiguchi
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/0A3221C70F24FB45833433255569204D1F8AD5D6%40G01JPEXMBYT05
Documentation of word_similarity() and strict_word_similarity() functions
contains some vague wordings which could confuse users. This patch makes
those wordings more clear. word_similarity() was introduced in PostgreSQL 9.6,
and corresponding part of documentation needs to be backpatched.
Author: Bruce Momjian, Alexander Korotkov
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180526165648.GB12510%40momjian.us
Backpatch: 9.6, where word_similarity() was introduced
kern.ipc.shm_use_phys is not a sysctl on OpenBSD, and SEMMAP is not
a kernel configuration option. These were probably copy pasteos from
when the documentation had a single paragraph for *BSD.
Author: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
OFFSET <x> ROWS FETCH FIRST <y> ROWS ONLY syntax is supposed to accept
<simple value specification>, which includes parameters as well as
literals. When this syntax was added all those years ago, it was done
inconsistently, with <x> and <y> being different subsets of the
standard syntax.
Rectify that by making <x> and <y> accept the same thing, and allowing
either a (signed) numeric literal or a c_expr there, which allows for
parameters, variables, and parenthesized arbitrary expressions.
Per bug #15200 from Lukas Eder.
Backpatch all the way, since this has been broken from the start.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/877enz476l.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/152647780335.27204.16895288237122418685@wrigleys.postgresql.org
An xref to a <para>'s ID isn't very helpful because paras don't have
names. This causes a warning while building PDFs, though for some
reason not while building HTML. The link arguably went to the wrong
place, too.
To fix, introduce a sub-section we can reference.
The "l" (ell) width spec means something in the corresponding scanf usage,
but not here. While modern POSIX says that applying "l" to "f" and other
floating format specs is a no-op, SUSv2 says it's undefined. Buildfarm
experience says that some old compilers emit warnings about it, and at
least one old stdio implementation (mingw's "ANSI" option) actually
produces wrong answers and/or crashes.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/21670.1526769114@sss.pgh.pa.us
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/c085e1da-0d64-1c15-242d-c921f32e0d5c@dunslane.net
The description of the index property backward_scan was incorrect and
misleading; rectify.
Backpatch to 9.6 where the amutils functionality was introduced.
Explain partition pruning more thoroughly, in a section above the one
that explains constraint exclusion, since the new feature is the one
that will be used more extensively from now on. Move some of the
material from the constraint exclusion subsection to the one on
partition pruning, so that we can explain the legacy method by
explaining the differences with the new one instead of repeating it.
Author: David Rowley, Álvaro Herrera
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote, David G. Johnston, Justin Pryzby
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f8PECxEi1YQ9nhVtshtfOMHUzAMm_Zp4gGCOCnMPjEKJA@mail.gmail.com
I get "WARNING: nested link may be undefined in output: <xref @linkend =
'pgbench'> nested inside parent element link" from this.
Also remove some trailing whitespace.
