Re: WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
To: Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>, Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>, Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennikova@postgrespro.ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-04-11T00:45:29Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:
> _bt_mark_page_halfdead() looked like it had a problem, but it now
> looks like I was wrong.

I did find another problem, though. Looks like the idea to explicitly
represent the number of attributes directly has paid off already:

pg@~[3711]=# create table covering_bug (f1 int, f2 int, f3 text);
create unique index cov_idx on covering_bug (f1) include(f2);
insert into covering_bug select i, i * random() * 1000, i * random() *
100000 from generate_series(0,100000) i;
DEBUG:  building index "pg_toast_16451_index" on table "pg_toast_16451" serially
CREATE TABLE
DEBUG:  building index "cov_idx" on table "covering_bug" serially
CREATE INDEX
ERROR:  tuple has wrong number of attributes in index "cov_idx"

Note that amcheck can detect the issue with the index after the fact, too:

pg@~[3711]=# select bt_index_check('cov_idx');
ERROR:  wrong number of index tuple attributes for index "cov_idx"
DETAIL:  Index tid=(3,2) natts=2 points to index tid=(2,92) page lsn=0/170DC88.

I don't think that the issue is complicated. Looks like we missed a
place that we have to truncate within _bt_split(), located directly
after this comment block:

    /*
     * If the page we're splitting is not the rightmost page at its level in
     * the tree, then the first entry on the page is the high key for the
     * page.  We need to copy that to the right half.  Otherwise (meaning the
     * rightmost page case), all the items on the right half will be user
     * data.
     */

I believe that the reason that we didn't find this bug prior to commit
is that we only have a single index tuple with the wrong number of
attributes after an initial root page split through insertions, but
the next root page split masks the problems. Not 100% sure that that's
why we missed it just yet, though.

This bug shouldn't be hard to fix. I'll take care of it as part of
that post-commit review patch I'm working on.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan


Commits

  1. Adjust INCLUDE index truncation comments and code.

  2. Add commentary explaining why MaxIndexTuplesPerPage calculation is safe.

  3. Indexes with INCLUDE columns and their support in B-tree

  4. Add amcheck verification of heap relations belonging to btree indexes.

  5. Doc: move info for btree opclass implementors into main documentation.

  6. Doc: mention that you can't PREPARE TRANSACTION after NOTIFY.

  7. Remove dedicated B-tree root-split record types.

  8. Restructure index access method API to hide most of it at the C level.

  9. Split _bt_insertonpg to two functions.

  10. Major overhaul of btree index code. Eliminate special BTP_CHAIN logic for