| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Backpatch-through: 13
|
|
This allows a RETURNING clause to be appended to a MERGE query, to
return values based on each row inserted, updated, or deleted. As with
plain INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE commands, the returned values are
based on the new contents of the target table for INSERT and UPDATE
actions, and on its old contents for DELETE actions. Values from the
source relation may also be returned.
As with INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE, the output of MERGE ... RETURNING may be
used as the source relation for other operations such as WITH queries
and COPY commands.
Additionally, a special function merge_action() is provided, which
returns 'INSERT', 'UPDATE', or 'DELETE', depending on the action
executed for each row. The merge_action() function can be used
anywhere in the RETURNING list, including in arbitrary expressions and
subqueries, but it is an error to use it anywhere outside of a MERGE
query's RETURNING list.
Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Isaac Morland, Vik Fearing, Alvaro Herrera,
Gurjeet Singh, Jian He, Jeff Davis, Merlin Moncure, Peter Eisentraut,
and Wolfgang Walther.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCWePEGQR5LBn-vD6SfeLZafzEm2Qy_L_Oky2=qw2w3Pzg@mail.gmail.com
|
|
as determined by include-what-you-use (IWYU)
While IWYU also suggests to *add* a bunch of #include's (which is its
main purpose), this patch does not do that. In some cases, a more
specific #include replaces another less specific one.
Some manual adjustments of the automatic result:
- IWYU currently doesn't know about includes that provide global
variable declarations (like -Wmissing-variable-declarations), so
those includes are being kept manually.
- All includes for port(ability) headers are being kept for now, to
play it safe.
- No changes of catalog/pg_foo.h to catalog/pg_foo_d.h, to keep the
patch from exploding in size.
Note that this patch touches just *.c files, so nothing declared in
header files changes in hidden ways.
As a small example, in src/backend/access/transam/rmgr.c, some IWYU
pragma annotations are added to handle a special case there.
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/af837490-6b2f-46df-ba05-37ea6a6653fc%40eisentraut.org
|
|
Reported-by: Michael Paquier
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/ZZKTDPxBBMt3C0J9@paquier.xyz
Backpatch-through: 12
|
|
If MERGE executes an UPDATE action on a table with row-level security,
the code incorrectly applied the WITH CHECK clauses from the target
table's INSERT policies to new rows, instead of the clauses from the
table's UPDATE policies. In addition, it failed to check new rows
against the target table's SELECT policies, if SELECT permissions were
required (likely to always be the case).
In addition, if MERGE executes a DO NOTHING action for matched rows,
the code incorrectly applied the USING clauses from the target table's
DELETE policies to existing target tuples. These policies were applied
as checks that would throw an error, if they did not pass.
Fix this, so that a MERGE UPDATE action applies the same RLS policies
as a plain UPDATE query with a WHERE clause, and a DO NOTHING action
does not apply any RLS checks (other than adding clauses from SELECT
policies to the join).
Back-patch to v15, where MERGE was introduced.
Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Stephen Frost.
Security: CVE-2023-39418
|
|
Run pgindent, pgperltidy, and reformat-dat-files.
This set of diffs is a bit larger than typical. We've updated to
pg_bsd_indent 2.1.2, which properly indents variable declarations that
have multi-line initialization expressions (the continuation lines are
now indented one tab stop). We've also updated to perltidy version
20230309 and changed some of its settings, which reduces its desire to
add whitespace to lines to make assignments etc. line up. Going
forward, that should make for fewer random-seeming changes to existing
code.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20230428092545.qfb3y5wcu4cm75ur@alvherre.pgsql
|
|
Backpatch-through: 11
|
|
Currently, information about the permissions to be checked on relations
mentioned in a query is stored in their range table entries. So the
executor must scan the entire range table looking for relations that
need to have permissions checked. This can make the permission checking
part of the executor initialization needlessly expensive when many
inheritance children are present in the range range. While the
permissions need not be checked on the individual child relations, the
executor still must visit every range table entry to filter them out.
This commit moves the permission checking information out of the range
table entries into a new plan node called RTEPermissionInfo. Every
top-level (inheritance "root") RTE_RELATION entry in the range table
gets one and a list of those is maintained alongside the range table.
This new list is initialized by the parser when initializing the range
table. The rewriter can add more entries to it as rules/views are
expanded. Finally, the planner combines the lists of the individual
subqueries into one flat list that is passed to the executor for
checking.
To make it quick to find the RTEPermissionInfo entry belonging to a
given relation, RangeTblEntry gets a new Index field 'perminfoindex'
that stores the corresponding RTEPermissionInfo's index in the query's
list of the latter.
ExecutorCheckPerms_hook has gained another List * argument; the
signature is now:
typedef bool (*ExecutorCheckPerms_hook_type) (List *rangeTable,
List *rtePermInfos,
bool ereport_on_violation);
The first argument is no longer used by any in-core uses of the hook,
but we leave it in place because there may be other implementations that
do. Implementations should likely scan the rtePermInfos list to
determine which operations to allow or deny.
Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqGjJDmUhDSfv-U2qhKJjt9ST7Xh9JXC_irsAQ1TAUsJYg@mail.gmail.com
|
|
A future commit will move the checkAsUser field from RangeTblEntry
to a new node that, unlike RTEs, will only be created for tables
mentioned in the query but not for the inheritance child relations
added to the query by the planner. So, checkAsUser value for a
given child relation will have to be obtained by referring to that
for its ancestor mentioned in the query.
In preparation, it seems better to expand the use of RelOptInfo.userid
during planning in place of rte->checkAsUser so that there will be
fewer places to adjust for the above change.
Given that the child-to-ancestor mapping is not available during the
execution of a given "child" ForeignScan node, add a checkAsUser
field to ForeignScan to carry the child relation's RelOptInfo.userid.
Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA+HiwqGFCs2uq7VRKi7g+FFKbP6Ea_2_HkgZb2HPhUfaAKT3ng@mail.gmail.com
|
|
In a similar effort to f01592f91, here we're targetting fixing the
warnings where we've deemed the shadowing variable to serve a close enough
purpose to the shadowed variable just to reuse the shadowed version and
not declare the shadowing variable at all.
By my count, this takes the warning count from 106 down to 71.
Author: Justin Pryzby
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20220825020839.GT2342@telsasoft.com
|
|
MERGE performs actions that modify rows in the target table using a
source table or query. MERGE provides a single SQL statement that can
conditionally INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE rows -- a task that would otherwise
require multiple PL statements. For example,
MERGE INTO target AS t
USING source AS s
ON t.tid = s.sid
WHEN MATCHED AND t.balance > s.delta THEN
UPDATE SET balance = t.balance - s.delta
WHEN MATCHED THEN
DELETE
WHEN NOT MATCHED AND s.delta > 0 THEN
INSERT VALUES (s.sid, s.delta)
WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN
DO NOTHING;
MERGE works with regular tables, partitioned tables and inheritance
hierarchies, including column and row security enforcement, as well as
support for row and statement triggers and transition tables therein.
MERGE is optimized for OLTP and is parameterizable, though also useful
for large scale ETL/ELT. MERGE is not intended to be used in preference
to existing single SQL commands for INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE since there
is some overhead. MERGE can be used from PL/pgSQL.
MERGE does not support targetting updatable views or foreign tables, and
RETURNING clauses are not allowed either. These limitations are likely
fixable with sufficient effort. Rewrite rules are also not supported,
but it's not clear that we'd want to support them.
Author: Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Author: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Author: Simon Riggs <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Reviewed-by: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> (earlier versions)
Reviewed-by: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> (earlier versions)
Reviewed-by: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> (earlier versions)
Reviewed-by: Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
Reviewed-by: Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CANP8+jKitBSrB7oTgT9CY2i1ObfOt36z0XMraQc+Xrz8QB0nXA@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-WzkJdBuxj9PO=2QaO9-3h3xGbQPZ34kJH=HukRekwM-GZg@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20201231134736.GA25392@alvherre.pgsql
|
|
Backpatch-through: 10
|
|
|
|
Backpatch-through: 9.5
|
|
Backpatch-through: update all files in master, backpatch legal files through 9.4
|
|
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20191128144653.GA27883@alvherre.pgsql
|
|
Similar to commits 7e735035f2 and dddf4cdc33, this commit makes the order
of header file inclusion consistent for backend modules.
In the passing, removed a couple of duplicate inclusions.
Author: Vignesh C
Reviewed-by: Kuntal Ghosh and Amit Kapila
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CALDaNm2Sznv8RR6Ex-iJO6xAdsxgWhCoETkaYX=+9DW3q0QCfA@mail.gmail.com
|
|
In the wake of commit 1cff1b95a, the obvious way to sort a List
is to apply qsort() directly to the array of ListCells. list_qsort
was building an intermediate array of pointers-to-ListCells, which
we no longer need, but getting rid of it forces an API change:
the comparator functions need to do one less level of indirection.
Since we're having to touch the callers anyway, let's do two additional
changes: sort the given list in-place rather than making a copy (as
none of the existing callers have any use for the copying behavior),
and rename list_qsort to list_sort. It was argued that the old name
exposes more about the implementation than it should, which I find
pretty questionable, but a better reason to rename it is to be sure
we get the attention of any external callers about the need to fix
their comparator functions.
While we're at it, change four existing callers of qsort() to use
list_sort instead; previously, they all had local reinventions
of list_qsort, ie build-an-array-from-a-List-and-qsort-it.
(There are some other places where changing to list_sort perhaps
would be worthwhile, but they're less obviously wins.)
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/29361.1563220190@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
|
Switch to 2.1 version of pg_bsd_indent. This formats
multiline function declarations "correctly", that is with
additional lines of parameter declarations indented to match
where the first line's left parenthesis is.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEepm=0P3FeTXRcU5B2W3jv3PgRVZ-kGUXLGfd42FFhUROO3ug@mail.gmail.com
|
|
When accessing a table with RLS via a view, the RLS checks are
performed as the view owner. However, the code neglected to propagate
that to any subqueries in the RLS checks. Fix that by calling
setRuleCheckAsUser() for all RLS policy quals and withCheckOption
checks for RTEs with RLS.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was added.
Per bug #15708 from daurnimator.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/15708-d65cab2ce9b1717a@postgresql.org
|
|
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190111000539.xbv7s6w7ilcvm7dp@alap3.anarazel.de
|
|
A lot of files only included heapam.h for relation_open, heap_open etc
- replace the heapam.h include in those files with the narrower
header.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190111000539.xbv7s6w7ilcvm7dp@alap3.anarazel.de
|
|
Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.4
|
|
This reverts commits d204ef63776b8a00ca220adec23979091564e465,
83454e3c2b28141c0db01c7d2027e01040df5249 and a few more commits thereafter
(complete list at the end) related to MERGE feature.
While the feature was fully functional, with sufficient test coverage and
necessary documentation, it was felt that some parts of the executor and
parse-analyzer can use a different design and it wasn't possible to do that in
the available time. So it was decided to revert the patch for PG11 and retry
again in the future.
Thanks again to all reviewers and bug reporters.
List of commits reverted, in reverse chronological order:
f1464c5380 Improve parse representation for MERGE
ddb4158579 MERGE syntax diagram correction
530e69e59b Allow cpluspluscheck to pass by renaming variable
01b88b4df5 MERGE minor errata
3af7b2b0d4 MERGE fix variable warning in non-assert builds
a5d86181ec MERGE INSERT allows only one VALUES clause
4b2d44031f MERGE post-commit review
4923550c20 Tab completion for MERGE
aa3faa3c7a WITH support in MERGE
83454e3c2b New files for MERGE
d204ef6377 MERGE SQL Command following SQL:2016
Author: Pavan Deolasee
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier
|
|
Traditionally, include/catalog/pg_foo.h contains extern declarations
for functions in backend/catalog/pg_foo.c, in addition to its function
as the authoritative definition of the pg_foo catalog's rowtype.
In some cases, we'd been forced to split out those extern declarations
into separate pg_foo_fn.h headers so that the catalog definitions
could be #include'd by frontend code. That problem is gone as of
commit 9c0a0de4c, so let's undo the splits to make things less
confusing.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/23690.1523031777@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
|
MERGE performs actions that modify rows in the target table
using a source table or query. MERGE provides a single SQL
statement that can conditionally INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE rows
a task that would other require multiple PL statements.
e.g.
MERGE INTO target AS t
USING source AS s
ON t.tid = s.sid
WHEN MATCHED AND t.balance > s.delta THEN
UPDATE SET balance = t.balance - s.delta
WHEN MATCHED THEN
DELETE
WHEN NOT MATCHED AND s.delta > 0 THEN
INSERT VALUES (s.sid, s.delta)
WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN
DO NOTHING;
MERGE works with regular and partitioned tables, including
column and row security enforcement, as well as support for
row, statement and transition triggers.
MERGE is optimized for OLTP and is parameterizable, though
also useful for large scale ETL/ELT. MERGE is not intended
to be used in preference to existing single SQL commands
for INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE since there is some overhead.
MERGE can be used statically from PL/pgSQL.
MERGE does not yet support inheritance, write rules,
RETURNING clauses, updatable views or foreign tables.
MERGE follows SQL Standard per the most recent SQL:2016.
Includes full tests and documentation, including full
isolation tests to demonstrate the concurrent behavior.
This version written from scratch in 2017 by Simon Riggs,
using docs and tests originally written in 2009. Later work
from Pavan Deolasee has been both complex and deep, leaving
the lead author credit now in his hands.
Extensive discussion of concurrency from Peter Geoghegan,
with thanks for the time and effort contributed.
Various issues reported via sqlsmith by Andreas Seltenreich
Authors: Pavan Deolasee, Simon Riggs
Reviewer: Peter Geoghegan, Amit Langote, Tomas Vondra, Simon Riggs
Discussion:
https://postgr.es/m/CANP8+jKitBSrB7oTgT9CY2i1ObfOt36z0XMraQc+Xrz8QB0nXA@mail.gmail.com
https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-WzkJdBuxj9PO=2QaO9-3h3xGbQPZ34kJH=HukRekwM-GZg@mail.gmail.com
|
|
This reverts commit 354f13855e6381d288dfaa52bcd4f2cb0fd4a5eb.
|
|
|
|
Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.3
|
|
The comments in get_policies_for_relation() say that CREATE POLICY
does not support defining restrictive policies. This is no longer
true, starting from PG10.
|
|
The update path of an INSERT ... ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE requires SELECT
permission on the columns of the arbiter index, but it failed to check
for that in the case of an arbiter specified by constraint name.
In addition, for a table with row level security enabled, it failed to
check updated rows against the table's SELECT policies when the update
path was taken (regardless of how the arbiter index was specified).
Backpatch to 9.5 where ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE and RLS were introduced.
Security: CVE-2017-15099
|
|
Don't move parenthesized lines to the left, even if that means they
flow past the right margin.
By default, BSD indent lines up statement continuation lines that are
within parentheses so that they start just to the right of the preceding
left parenthesis. However, traditionally, if that resulted in the
continuation line extending to the right of the desired right margin,
then indent would push it left just far enough to not overrun the margin,
if it could do so without making the continuation line start to the left of
the current statement indent. That makes for a weird mix of indentations
unless one has been completely rigid about never violating the 80-column
limit.
This behavior has been pretty universally panned by Postgres developers.
Hence, disable it with indent's new -lpl switch, so that parenthesized
lines are always lined up with the preceding left paren.
This patch is much less interesting than the first round of indent
changes, but also bulkier, so I thought it best to separate the effects.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1dAmxK-0006EE-1r@gemulon.postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/30527.1495162840@sss.pgh.pa.us
|
|
When we add the SELECT-privilege based policies to the RLS with check
options (such as for an UPDATE statement, or when we have INSERT ...
RETURNING), we need to be sure and use the 'USING' case if the policy is
actually an 'ALL' policy (which could have both a USING clause and an
independent WITH CHECK clause).
This could result in policies acting differently when built using ALL
(when the ALL had both USING and WITH CHECK clauses) and when building
the policies independently as SELECT and UPDATE policies.
Fix this by adding an explicit boolean to add_with_check_options() to
indicate when the USING policy should be used, even if the policy has
both USING and WITH CHECK policies on it.
Reported by: Rod Taylor
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
|
|
|
|
makeNode() is already a macro that has the right result pointer type, so
casting it again to the same type is unnecessary.
|
|
Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the
existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences.
The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may
not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no
sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called
partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an
implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not
allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions
can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent
does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the
correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed.
Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign
tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries.
Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List
partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can
involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an
expression.
Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it
is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of
partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation
for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner
optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on
the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it
seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible.
Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat,
Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova,
Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
|
|
We have had support for restrictive RLS policies since 9.5, but they
were only available through extensions which use the appropriate hooks.
This adds support into the grammer, catalog, psql and pg_dump for
restrictive RLS policies, thus reducing the cases where an extension is
necessary.
In passing, also move away from using "AND"d and "OR"d in comments.
As pointed out by Alvaro, it's not really appropriate to attempt
to make verbs out of "AND" and "OR", so reword those comments which
attempted to.
Reviewed By: Jeevan Chalke, Dean Rasheed
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20160901063404.GY4028@tamriel.snowman.net
|
|
|
|
Backpatch certain files through 9.1
|
|
Similar to 7d8db3e, given that INSERT+RETURNING requires SELECT rights
on the table, apply the SELECT policies as WCOs to the tuples being
inserted. Apply the same logic to UPDATE+RETURNING.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was added.
|
|
When considering which policies should be included, rather than look at
individual bits of the query (eg: if a RETURNING clause exists, or if a
WHERE clause exists which is referencing the table, or if it's a
FOR SHARE/UPDATE query), consider any case where we've determined
the user needs SELECT rights on the relation while doing an UPDATE or
DELETE to be a case where we apply SELECT policies, and any case where
we've deteremind that the user needs UPDATE rights on the relation while
doing a SELECT to be a case where we apply UPDATE policies.
This simplifies the logic and addresses concerns that a user could use
UPDATE or DELETE with a WHERE clauses to determine if rows exist, or
they could use SELECT .. FOR UPDATE to lock rows which they are not
actually allowed to modify through UPDATE policies.
Use list_append_unique() to avoid adding the same quals multiple times,
as, on balance, the cost of checking when adding the quals will almost
always be cheaper than keeping them and doing busywork for each tuple
during execution.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was added.
|
|
For the UPDATE/DELETE RETURNING case, filter the records which are not
visible to the user through ALL or SELECT policies from those considered
for the UPDATE or DELETE. This is similar to how the GRANT system
works, which prevents RETURNING unless the caller has SELECT rights on
the relation.
Per discussion with Robert, Dean, Tom, and Kevin.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
|
|
This refactors rewrite/rowsecurity.c to simplify the handling of the
default deny case (reducing the number of places where we check for and
add the default deny policy from three to one) by splitting up the
retrival of the policies from the application of them.
This also allowed us to do away with the policy_id field. A policy_name
field was added for WithCheckOption policies and is used in error
reporting, when available.
Patch by Dean Rasheed, with various mostly cosmetic changes by me.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was introduced to avoid unnecessary
differences, since we're still in alpha, per discussion with Robert.
|
|
Only remove the default deny policy when a permissive policy exists
(either from the hook or defined by the user). If only restrictive
policies exist then no rows will be visible, as restrictive policies
shouldn't make rows visible. To address this requirement, a single
"USING (true)" permissive policy can be created.
Update the test_rls_hooks regression tests to create the necessary
"USING (true)" permissive policy.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was added.
Per discussion with Dean.
|
|
When retrieving policies, if not working on the root target relation,
we actually want the relation's SELECT policies, regardless of
the top level query command type. For example in UPDATE t1...FROM t2
we need to apply t1's UPDATE policies and t2's SELECT policies.
Previously top level query command type was applied to all relations,
which was wrong. Add some regression coverage to ensure we don't
violate this principle in the future.
Report and patch by Dean Rasheed. Cherry picked from larger refactoring
patch and tweaked by me. Back-patched to 9.5 where RLS was introduced.
|
|
The pg_stats view is supposed to be restricted to only show rows
about tables the user can read. However, it sometimes can leak
information which could not otherwise be seen when row level security
is enabled. Fix that by not showing pg_stats rows to users that would
be subject to RLS on the table the row is related to. This is done
by creating/using the newly introduced SQL visible function,
row_security_active().
Along the way, clean up three call sites of check_enable_rls(). The second
argument of that function should only be specified as other than
InvalidOid when we are checking as a different user than the current one,
as in when querying through a view. These sites were passing GetUserId()
instead of InvalidOid, which can cause the function to return incorrect
results if the current user has the BYPASSRLS privilege and row_security
has been set to OFF.
Additionally fix a bug causing RI Trigger error messages to unintentionally
leak information when RLS is enabled, and other minor cleanup and
improvements. Also add WITH (security_barrier) to the definition of pg_stats.
Bumped CATVERSION due to new SQL functions and pg_stats view definition.
Back-patch to 9.5 where RLS was introduced. Reported by Yaroslav.
Patch by Joe Conway and Dean Rasheed with review and input by
Michael Paquier and Stephen Frost.
|
|
Fix some places where pgindent did silly stuff, often because project
style wasn't followed to begin with. (I've not touched the atomics
headers, though.)
|
|
|
|
The newly added ON CONFLICT clause allows to specify an alternative to
raising a unique or exclusion constraint violation error when inserting.
ON CONFLICT refers to constraints that can either be specified using a
inference clause (by specifying the columns of a unique constraint) or
by naming a unique or exclusion constraint. DO NOTHING avoids the
constraint violation, without touching the pre-existing row. DO UPDATE
SET ... [WHERE ...] updates the pre-existing tuple, and has access to
both the tuple proposed for insertion and the existing tuple; the
optional WHERE clause can be used to prevent an update from being
executed. The UPDATE SET and WHERE clauses have access to the tuple
proposed for insertion using the "magic" EXCLUDED alias, and to the
pre-existing tuple using the table name or its alias.
This feature is often referred to as upsert.
This is implemented using a new infrastructure called "speculative
insertion". It is an optimistic variant of regular insertion that first
does a pre-check for existing tuples and then attempts an insert. If a
violating tuple was inserted concurrently, the speculatively inserted
tuple is deleted and a new attempt is made. If the pre-check finds a
matching tuple the alternative DO NOTHING or DO UPDATE action is taken.
If the insertion succeeds without detecting a conflict, the tuple is
deemed inserted.
To handle the possible ambiguity between the excluded alias and a table
named excluded, and for convenience with long relation names, INSERT
INTO now can alias its target table.
Bumps catversion as stored rules change.
Author: Peter Geoghegan, with significant contributions from Heikki
Linnakangas and Andres Freund. Testing infrastructure by Jeff Janes.
Reviewed-By: Heikki Linnakangas, Andres Freund, Robert Haas, Simon Riggs,
Dean Rasheed, Stephen Frost and many others.
|
|
The RLS capability is built on top of the WITH CHECK OPTION
system which was added for auto-updatable views, however, unlike
WCOs on views (which are mandated by the SQL spec to not fire until
after all other constraints and checks are done), it makes much more
sense for RLS checks to happen earlier than constraint and uniqueness
checks.
This patch reworks the structure which holds the WCOs a bit to be
explicitly either VIEW or RLS checks and the RLS-related checks are
done prior to the constraint and uniqueness checks. This also allows
better error reporting as we are now reporting when a violation is due
to a WITH CHECK OPTION and when it's due to an RLS policy violation,
which was independently noted by Craig Ringer as being confusing.
The documentation is also updated to include a paragraph about when RLS
WITH CHECK handling is performed, as there have been a number of
questions regarding that and the documentation was previously silent on
the matter.
Author: Dean Rasheed, with some kabitzing and comment changes by me.
|
