Thread
Commits
-
Avoid assertion failure if a setop leaf query contains setops.
- fea81aee83b5 17.3 landed
- fe084039e482 16.7 landed
- 9b9689e26cb6 15.11 landed
- 94131cd53c15 18.0 landed
- 630520c22fbb 13.19 landed
- 3eb26524ca35 14.16 landed
-
[PATCH] Fixed assertion issues in "pg_get_viewdef"
zengman <zengman@halodbtech.com> — 2024-11-15T11:05:33Z
Hi everyone, The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 18710 Logged by: Man Zeng Email address: zengman(at)halodbtech(dot)com PostgreSQL version: 14.14 Operating system: centos-8 Description: A prototype of the problem from https://github.com/duckdb/pg_duckdb/issues/435 This exception can be reliably triggered by calling "pg_get_viewdef" Step 1 : CREATE VIEW view_a AS WITH RECURSIVE outermost(x) AS ( SELECT 1 UNION (WITH innermost1 AS ( SELECT 2) SELECT * FROM outermost UNION SELECT * FROM innermost1) ) SELECT * FROM outermost ORDER BY 1; Step 2 : SELECT oid FROM pg_class where relname = 'view_a'; Step 3: SELECT pg_get_viewdef( this oid ); -- error The abnormalities appear as follows [postgres(at)iZuf6hwo0wgeev4dvua4csZ postgres]$ psql psql (14.14) Type "help" for help. postgres=# CREATE VIEW view_a AS postgres-# WITH RECURSIVE outermost(x) AS ( postgres(# SELECT 1 postgres(# UNION (WITH innermost1 AS ( postgres(# SELECT 2) postgres(# SELECT * FROM outermost postgres(# UNION SELECT * FROM innermost1) postgres(# ) postgres-# SELECT * FROM outermost ORDER BY 1; CREATE VIEW postgres=# SELECT * FROM pg_class where relname = 'view_a'; oid | relname | relnamespace | reltype | reloftype | relowner | relam | relfilenode | reltablespace | relpages | reltuples | relallvisible | reltoastrelid | relhasindex | relisshared | relpersistence | relkind | relnatt s | relchecks | relhasrules | relhastriggers | relhassubclass | relrowsecurity | relforcerowsecurity | relispopulated | relreplident | relispartition | relrewrite | relfrozenxid | relminmxid | relacl | reloptions | relpart bound -------+---------+--------------+---------+-----------+----------+-------+-------------+---------------+----------+-----------+---------------+---------------+-------------+-------------+----------------+---------+-------- --+-----------+-------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+---------------------+----------------+--------------+----------------+------------+--------------+------------+--------+------------+-------- ------ 32768 | view_a | 2200 | 32770 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 0 | f | f | p | v | 1 | 0 | t | f | f | f | f | t | n | f | 0 | 0 | 0 | | | (1 row) postgres=# select pg_get_viewdef(32768); TRAP: FailedAssertion("subquery->setOperations == NULL", File: "ruleutils.c", Line: 6094, PID: 325948) postgres: postgres postgres [local] SELECT(ExceptionalCondition+0xb9)[0xb1a6c1] postgres: postgres postgres [local] SELECT[0xa95d6b] postgres: postgres postgres [local] SELECT[0xa960b5] ...... Fix: We can comment out the assertion that raises the exception, because I looked up the code and found that the assertion doesn't seem to make a lot of sense here. Please find the patch attached. -
Re: [PATCH] Fixed assertion issues in "pg_get_viewdef"
zengman <zengman@halodbtech.com> — 2024-11-15T12:06:41Z
Hi everyone, The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 18710 Logged by: Man Zeng Email address: zengman(at)halodbtech(dot)com PostgreSQL version: 14.14 Operating system: centos-8 Description: A prototype of the problem from https://github.com/duckdb/pg_duckdb/issues/435 This exception can be reliably triggered by calling "pg_get_viewdef" Step 1 : CREATE VIEW view_a AS WITH RECURSIVE outermost(x) AS ( SELECT 1 UNION (WITH innermost1 AS ( SELECT 2) SELECT * FROM outermost UNION SELECT * FROM innermost1)) SELECT * FROM outermost ORDER BY 1; Step 2 : SELECT oid FROM pg_class where relname = 'view_a'; Step 3: SELECT pg_get_viewdef( this oid ); -- error The abnormalities appear as follows [postgres(at)iZuf6hwo0wgeev4dvua4csZ postgres]$ psql psql (14.14) Type "help" for help. postgres=# CREATE VIEW view_a AS postgres-# WITH RECURSIVE outermost(x) AS ( postgres(# SELECT 1 postgres(# UNION (WITH innermost1 AS ( postgres(# SELECT 2) postgres(# SELECT * FROM outermost postgres(# UNION SELECT * FROM innermost1) postgres(# ) postgres-# SELECT * FROM outermost ORDER BY 1; CREATE VIEW postgres=# SELECT * FROM pg_class where relname = 'view_a'; oid | relname | relnamespace | reltype | reloftype | relowner | relam | relfilenode | reltablespace | relpages | reltuples | relallvisible | reltoastrelid | relhasindex | relisshared | relpersistence | relkind | relnatt s | relchecks | relhasrules | relhastriggers | relhassubclass | relrowsecurity | relforcerowsecurity | relispopulated | relreplident | relispartition | relrewrite | relfrozenxid | relminmxid | relacl | reloptions | relpart bound -------+---------+--------------+---------+-----------+----------+-------+-------------+---------------+----------+-----------+---------------+---------------+-------------+-------------+----------------+---------+-------- --+-----------+-------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+---------------------+----------------+--------------+----------------+------------+--------------+------------+--------+------------+-------- ------ 32768 | view_a | 2200 | 32770 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 0 | f | f | p | v | 1 | 0 | t | f | f | f | f | t | n | f | 0 | 0 | 0 | | | (1 row) postgres=# select pg_get_viewdef(32768); TRAP: FailedAssertion("subquery->setOperations == NULL", File: "ruleutils.c", Line: 6094, PID: 325948) postgres: postgres postgres [local] SELECT(ExceptionalCondition+0xb9)[0xb1a6c1] postgres: postgres postgres [local] SELECT[0xa95d6b] postgres: postgres postgres [local] SELECT[0xa960b5] ...... Fix: We can comment out the assertion that raises the exception, because I looked up the code and found that the assertion doesn't seem to make a lot of sense here. Please find the patch attached. -
Re: [PATCH] Fixed assertion issues in "pg_get_viewdef"
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2024-11-19T16:21:33Z
"=?utf-8?B?5pu+5ruh?=" <zengman@halodbtech.com> writes: > We can comment out the assertion that raises the exception, because I looked up the code and found that the assertion doesn't seem to make a lot > of sense here. I looked at the git history and found that I added this assertion in 07b4c48b6. Your example shows that indeed it's a thinko, but I'm not convinced that simply removing it is the best answer. The real point here is that we'd want to parenthesize if a "leaf" subquery contains set operations, to ensure that the setop nesting is represented correctly. Normally, a "leaf" query would not contain any set operations, but that can happen if the leaf query also contains WITH/ORDER BY/FOR UPDATE/LIMIT, because that stops transformSetOperationTree from merging it into the upper SetOperationStmt tree. So the assertion should have been less "can't have setOperations here" and more "can't have setOperations here unless there's also one of sortClause etc". But on reflection I don't see why it needs to be an assert at all. Let's just make nonempty setOperations another reason to force need_paren on, as attached. regards, tom lane
-
Re: [PATCH] Fixed assertion issues in "pg_get_viewdef"
zengman <zengman@halodbtech.com> — 2024-11-20T03:11:26Z
Thanks for your guidance, you are right, I looked at your patch and combined it with the example to generate a new patch, which is really better. Thanks, Man Zeng ------------------ Original ------------------ From: "Tom Lane"<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; Date: Wed, Nov 20, 2024 00:21 AM To: "曾满"<zengman@halodbtech.com>; Cc: "pgsql-hackers"<pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>; Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fixed assertion issues in "pg_get_viewdef" "=?utf-8?B?5pu+5ruh?=" <zengman@halodbtech.com> writes: > We can comment out the assertion that raises the exception, because I looked up the code and found that the assertion doesn't seem to make a lot > of sense here. I looked at the git history and found that I added this assertion in 07b4c48b6. Your example shows that indeed it's a thinko, but I'm not convinced that simply removing it is the best answer. The real point here is that we'd want to parenthesize if a "leaf" subquery contains set operations, to ensure that the setop nesting is represented correctly. Normally, a "leaf" query would not contain any set operations, but that can happen if the leaf query also contains WITH/ORDER BY/FOR UPDATE/LIMIT, because that stops transformSetOperationTree from merging it into the upper SetOperationStmt tree. So the assertion should have been less "can't have setOperations here" and more "can't have setOperations here unless there's also one of sortClause etc". But on reflection I don't see why it needs to be an assert at all. Let's just make nonempty setOperations another reason to force need_paren on, as attached. regards, tom lane
-
Re: [PATCH] Fixed assertion issues in "pg_get_viewdef"
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2024-11-20T17:06:45Z
"=?gb18030?B?emVuZ21hbg==?=" <zengman@halodbtech.com> writes: > Thanks for your guidance, you are right, I looked at your patch > and combined it with the example to generate a new patch, > which is really better. I pushed the code fix, but I can't really convince myself that the test case is worth the cycles it'd eat forevermore. If we had a way to reach the situation where there's setops but not any of the other clauses in a leaf query, perhaps that would be worth checking ... but we don't. It's just belt-and-suspenders-too programming. regards, tom lane