We realized years ago that it's better for libpq to accept all
connection parameters syntactically, even if some are ignored or
restricted due to lack of the feature in a particular build.
However, that lesson from the SSL support was for some reason never
applied to the GSSAPI support. This is causing various buildfarm
members to have problems with a test case added by commit 6136e94dc,
and it's just a bad idea from a user-experience standpoint anyway,
so fix it.
While at it, fix some places where parameter-related infrastructure
was added with the aid of a dartboard, or perhaps with the aid of
the anti-pattern "add new stuff at the end". It should be safe
to rearrange the contents of struct pg_conn even in released
branches, since that's private to libpq (and we'd have to move
some fields in some builds to fix this, anyway).
Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/11297.1576868677@sss.pgh.pa.us
The "auth-methods" <sect1> used to include descriptions of all our
authentication methods. Commit 56811e573 promoted its child <sect2>'s
to <sect1>'s, which has advantages but also created some issues:
* The auth-methods page itself is essentially empty/useless.
* Links that pointed to "auth-methods" as a placeholder for all
auth methods were rendered a bit nonsensical.
* DocBook no longer provides a subsection table-of-contents here,
which formerly was a useful if terse summary of available auth methods.
To improve matters, add a handwritten list of all the auth methods.
Per gripe from Dave Cramer. Back-patch to v11 where the previous
commit came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CADK3HH+xQLhcPgg=kWqfogtXGGZr-JdSo=x=WQC0PkAVyxUWyQ@mail.gmail.com
AfterTriggerExecute() retrieves a fresh tuple or pair of tuples from a
tuplestore and then stores the tuple(s) in the passed-in slot(s) if
AFTER_TRIGGER_FDW_FETCH, while it uses the most-recently-retrieved
tuple(s) stored in the slot(s) if AFTER_TRIGGER_FDW_REUSE. This was
done correctly before 12, but commit ff11e7f4b broke it by mistakenly
clearing the tuple(s) stored in the slot(s) in that function, leading to
an assertion failure as reported in bug #16139 from Alexander Lakhin.
Also, fix some other issues with the aforementioned commit in passing:
* For tg_newslot, which is a slot added to the TriggerData struct by the
commit to store new updated tuples, it didn't ensure the slot was NULL
if there was no such tuple.
* The commit failed to update the documentation about the trigger
interface.
Author: Etsuro Fujita
Backpatch-through: 12
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16139-94f9ccf0db6119ec%40postgresql.org
Commit 5770172cb0c9df9e6ce27c507b449557e5b45124 wrote, incorrectly, that
certain schema usage patterns are secure against CREATEROLE users and
database owners. When an untrusted user is the database owner or holds
CREATEROLE privilege, a query is secure only if its session started with
SELECT pg_catalog.set_config('search_path', '', false) or equivalent.
Back-patch to 9.4 (all supported versions).
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20191013013512.GC4131753@rfd.leadboat.com
The existing text stated that "Default privileges that are specified
per-schema are added to whatever the global default privileges are for
the particular object type". However, that bare-bones observation is
not quite clear enough, as demonstrated by the complaint in bug #16124.
Flesh it out by stating explicitly that you can't revoke built-in
default privileges this way, and by providing an example to drive
the point home.
Back-patch to all supported branches, since it's been like this
from the beginning.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16124-423d8ee4358421bc@postgresql.org
Commit 6b76f1bb5 changed all the RADIUS auth parameters to be lists
rather than single values. But its use of SplitIdentifierString
to parse the list format was not very carefully thought through,
because that function thinks it's parsing SQL identifiers, which
means it will (a) downcase the strings and (b) truncate them to
be shorter than NAMEDATALEN. While downcasing should be harmless
for the server names and ports, it's just wrong for the shared
secrets, and probably for the NAS Identifier strings as well.
The truncation aspect is at least potentially a problem too,
though typical values for these parameters would fit in 63 bytes.
Fortunately, we now have a function SplitGUCList that is exactly
the same except for not doing the two unwanted things, so fixing
this is a trivial matter of calling that function instead.
While here, improve the documentation to show how to double-quote
the parameter values. I failed to resist the temptation to do
some copy-editing as well.
Report and patch from Marcos David (bug #16106); doc changes by me.
Back-patch to v10 where the aforesaid commit came in, since this is
arguably a regression from our previous behavior with RADIUS auth.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16106-7d319e4295d08e70@postgresql.org
The point is that DELETE triggers cannot modify any values.
Reported-by: Eugen Konkov, Liudmila Mantrova
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/919823407.20191029175436@yandex.ru
Backpatch-through: 12 only, where commit as missing
The example of expansion of multiple views claimed that the resulting
subquery nest would not get fully flattened because of an aggregate
function. There's no aggregate in the example, though, only a user
defined function confusingly named MIN(). In a modern server, the
reason for the non-flattening is that MIN() is volatile, but I'm
unsure whether that was true back when this text was written.
Let's reduce the confusion level by using LEAST() instead (which
we didn't have at the time this example was created). And then
we can just say that the planner will flatten the sub-queries, so
the rewrite system doesn't have to.
Noted by Paul Jungwirth. This text is old enough to vote, so
back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+renyXZFnmp9PcvX1EVR2dR=XG5e6E-AELr8AHCNZ8RYrpnPw@mail.gmail.com
The previous statement that using a passphrase disables the ability to
change the server's SSL configuration without a server restart was no
longer completely true since the introduction of
ssl_passphrase_command_supports_reload.
As usual, the release notes for other branches will be made by cutting
these down, but put them up for community review first. Note that a
fair percentage of the entries apply only to prior branches because
their issue was already fixed in 12.0. I'll remove those from the 12.1
list later.
Currently, postgres_fdw does not support preparing a remote transaction
for two-phase commit even in the case where the remote transaction is
read-only, but the old error message appeared to imply that that was not
supported only if the remote transaction modified remote tables. Change
the message so as to include the case where the remote transaction is
read-only.
Also fix a comment above the message.
Also add a note about the lack of supporting PREPARE TRANSACTION to the
postgres_fdw documentation.
Reported-by: Gilles Darold
Author: Gilles Darold and Etsuro Fujita
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier and Kyotaro Horiguchi
Backpatch-through: 9.4
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/08600ed3-3084-be70-65ba-279ab19618a5%40darold.net
The docs do say which GUCs can be changed only by superusers, but we
forgot to mention this for the new log_transaction_sample_rate. This
GUC was introduced in PostgreSQL 12, so backpatch accordingly.
Author: Adrien Nayrat
Backpatch-through: 12
Since commit d26a810eb, we've defined bool as being either _Bool from
<stdbool.h>, or "unsigned char"; but that commit overlooked the fact
that probes.d has "#define bool char". For consistency, make it say
"unsigned char" instead. This should be strictly a cosmetic change,
but it seems best to be in sync.
Formally, in the now-normal case where we're using <stdbool.h>, it'd
be better to write "#define bool _Bool". However, then we'd need
some build infrastructure to inject that configuration choice into
probes.d, and it doesn't seem worth the trouble. We only use
<stdbool.h> if sizeof(_Bool) is 1, so having DTrace think that
bool parameters are "unsigned char" should be close enough.
Back-patch to v12 where d26a810eb came in.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAA4eK1LmaKO7Du9M9Lo=kxGU8sB6aL8fa3sF6z6d5yYYVe3BuQ@mail.gmail.com
Since 898e5e32, this command uses partially ShareUpdateExclusiveLock,
but the docs did not get the call.
Author: Justin Pryzby
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote, Álvaro Herrera, Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20191028001207.GB23808@telsasoft.com
Backpatch-through: 12
This clarifies more how to use and how to take advantage of constraints
when attaching a new partition.
Author: Justin Pryzby
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote, Álvaro Herrera, Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20191028001207.GB23808@telsasoft.com
Backpatch-through: 10
When we added the GUC units feature, we didn't make any great effort
to adjust the documentation of individual GUCs; they tended to still
say things like "this is the number of milliseconds that ...", even
though users might prefer to write some other units, and SHOW might
even show the value in other units. Commit 6c9fb69f2 made an effort
to improve this situation, but I thought it made things less readable
by injecting units information in mid-sentence. It also wasn't very
consistent, and did not touch all the GUCs that have units.
To improve matters, standardize on the phrasing "If this value is
specified without units, it is taken as <units>". Also, try to
standardize where this is mentioned, right before the specification
of the default. (In a couple of places, doing that would've required
more rewriting than seemed justified, so I wasn't 100% consistent
about that.) I also tried to use the phrases "amount of time",
"amount of memory", etc rather than describing the contents of GUCs
in other ways, as those were the majority usage in places that weren't
overcommitting to a particular unit. (I left "length of time" alone
in a couple of places, though.)
I failed to resist the temptation to copy-edit some awkward text, too.
Backpatch to v12, like 6c9fb69f2, mainly because v12 hasn't diverged
much from HEAD yet.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15882.1571942223@sss.pgh.pa.us
In v11 or before, this setting could not take effect in crash recovery
because it's specified in recovery.conf and crash recovery always
starts without recovery.conf. But commit 2dedf4d9a8 integrated
recovery.conf into postgresql.conf and which unexpectedly allowed
this setting to take effect even in crash recovery. This is definitely
not good behavior.
To fix the issue, this commit makes crash recovery always ignore
recovery_min_apply_delay setting.
Back-patch to v12 where the issue was added.
Author: Fujii Masao
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAHGQGwEyD6HdZLfdWc+95g=VQFPR4zQL4n+yHxQgGEGjaSVheQ@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/e445616d-023e-a268-8aa1-67b8b335340c@pgmasters.net
This fixes multiple areas of the documentation:
- COPY for its past compatibility section.
- SET ROLE mentioning INHERITS instead of INHERIT
- PREPARE referring to stmt_name, that is not present.
- Extension documentation about format name with upgrade scripts.
Backpatch down to 9.4 for the relevant parts.
Author: Alexander Lakhin
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/bf95233a-9943-b341-e2ff-a860c28af481@gmail.com
Backpatch-through: 9.4
Previously, our docs would say "Specifies the number of milliseconds"
but it wasn't clear that "milliseconds" was merely the default unit.
New text says "Specifies duration (defaults to milliseconds)", which is
clearer.
Reported-by: basil.bourque@gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15912-2e35e9026f61230b@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 12
Commit aa087ec64 was a bit over-hasty about the doc changes needed
while splitting pg_statistic_ext_data off from pg_statistic_ext.
It duplicated one para and inserted another in what seems to me
to be the wrong section. Fix that up, and in passing do some minor
copy-editing.
Per report from noborusai.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAM3qnLXLUz4mOBkqa8jxigpKhKNxzSuvwpjvCRPvO5EqWjxSg@mail.gmail.com
The behavior described in the PREPARE man page applies only for the
default plan_cache_mode setting, so explain that properly. Rewrite
some of the text while I'm here. Per suggestion from Bruce.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190930155505.GA21095@momjian.us
This commit adds a mention that the order of columns specified during
multi-column most-common-value statistics is insignificant, and tries to
simplify examples.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190828162238.GA8360@momjian.us
Backpatch-through: 12
