It's not OK for jsonpath_in() to PG_RETURN_NULL() on non-null (but invalid) input like " ". #1
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…valid) input like " ".
|
Thank you for the report and the fix. I have pushed now this commit to sqljson branch as is. But during next rebase, your commit can be moved or even squashed with original commit. |
No problem. Is this branch the best for me to submit pull requests to? Or perhaps it'd be better to push to some other branch? |
|
Yes, sqljson branch is the best for you if you are working with development version of PostgreSQL. It is based on master branch. sqljson_v10 branch is based on REL_10_STABLE. I am going to rebase sqljson branch onto master soon when the next version of the patches (that are built by grouping successive commits) will be ready for submitting to pgsql-hackers. |
glukhovn
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 7, 2019
The original setup for dependencies of partitioned objects had serious problems: 1. It did not verify that a drop cascading to a partition-child object also cascaded to at least one of the object's partition parents. Now, normally a child object would share all its dependencies with one or another parent (e.g. a child index's opclass dependencies would be shared with the parent index), so that this oversight is usually harmless. But if some dependency failed to fit this pattern, the child could be dropped while all its parents remain, creating a logically broken situation. (It's easy to construct artificial cases that break it, such as attaching an unrelated extension dependency to the child object and then dropping the extension. I'm not sure if any less-artificial cases exist.) 2. Management of partition dependencies during ATTACH/DETACH PARTITION was complicated and buggy; for example, after detaching a partition table it was possible to create cases where a formerly-child index should be dropped and was not, because the correct set of dependencies had not been reconstructed. Less seriously, because multiple partition relationships were represented identically in pg_depend, there was an order-of-traversal dependency on which partition parent was cited in error messages. We also had some pre-existing order-of-traversal hazards for error messages related to internal and extension dependencies. This is cosmetic to users but causes testing problems. To fix #1, add a check at the end of the partition tree traversal to ensure that at least one partition parent got deleted. To fix #2, establish a new policy that partition dependencies are in addition to, not instead of, a child object's usual dependencies; in this way ATTACH/DETACH PARTITION need not cope with adding or removing the usual dependencies. To fix the cosmetic problem, distinguish between primary and secondary partition dependency entries in pg_depend, by giving them different deptypes. (They behave identically except for having different priorities for being cited in error messages.) This means that the former 'I' dependency type is replaced with new 'P' and 'S' types. This also fixes a longstanding bug that after handling an internal dependency by recursing to the owning object, findDependentObjects did not verify that the current target was now scheduled for deletion, and did not apply the current recursion level's objflags to it. Perhaps that should be back-patched; but in the back branches it would only matter if some concurrent transaction had removed the internal-linkage pg_depend entry before the recursive call found it, or the recursive call somehow failed to find it, both of which seem unlikely. Catversion bump because the contents of pg_depend change for partitioning relationships. Patch HEAD only. It's annoying that we're not fixing #2 in v11, but there seems no practical way to do so given that the problem is exactly a poor choice of what entries to put in pg_depend. We can't really fix that while staying compatible with what's in pg_depend in existing v11 installations. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-Wzkypv1R+teZrr71U23J578NnTBt2X8+Y=Odr4pOdW1rXg@mail.gmail.com
glukhovn
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 7, 2019
…tions. Commit 3d956d9 added support for update row movement in postgres_fdw. This patch fixes the following issues introduced by that commit: * When a remote partition chosen to insert routed rows into was also an UPDATE subplan target rel that would be updated later, the UPDATE that used a direct modification plan modified those routed rows incorrectly because those routed rows were visible to the later UPDATE command. The right fix for this would be to have some way in postgres_fdw in which the later UPDATE command ignores those routed rows, but it seems hard to do so with the current infrastructure. For now throw an error in that case. * When a remote partition chosen to insert routed rows into was also an UPDATE subplan target rel, fmstate created for the UPDATE that used a non-direct modification plan was mistakenly overridden by another fmstate created for inserting those routed rows into the partition. This caused 1) server crash when the partition would be updated later, and 2) resource leak when the partition had been already updated. To avoid that, adjust the treatment of the fmstate for the inserting. As for #1, since we would also have the incorrectness issue as mentioned above, error out in that case as well. Update the docs to mention that postgres_fdw currently does not handle the case where a remote partition chosen to insert a routed row into is also an UPDATE subplan target rel that will be updated later. Author: Amit Langote and Etsuro Fujita Reviewed-by: Amit Langote Backpatch-through: 11 where row movement in postgres_fdw was added Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected]
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.