Re: pg_subscription.subslotname is wrongly marked NOT NULL - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Subject | Re: pg_subscription.subslotname is wrongly marked NOT NULL |
Date | |
Msg-id | 298837.1595196283@sss.pgh.pa.us Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: pg_subscription.subslotname is wrongly marked NOT NULL (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Responses |
Re: pg_subscription.subslotname is wrongly marked NOT NULL
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote: >> It's also a bit annoying that we have no mechanized checks that >> would catch this inconsistency. If JIT is going to be absolutely >> dependent on NOT NULL markings being accurate, we can't really >> have such a laissez-faire attitude to C code getting it wrong. > It seems like at least in assert-enabled builds, we'd better have > a cross-check for that. I'm not sure where's the best place. I concluded that we should put this into CatalogTupleInsert and CatalogTupleUpdate. The bootstrap data path already has a check (see InsertOneNull()), and so does the executor, so we only need to worry about tuples that're built manually by catalog manipulation code. I think all of that goes through these functions. Hence, as attached. ... and apparently, I should have done this task first, because damn if it didn't immediately expose another bug of the same ilk. pg_subscription_rel.srsublsn also needs to be marked nullable. regards, tom lane diff --git a/src/backend/catalog/indexing.c b/src/backend/catalog/indexing.c index d63fcf58cf..fe277f3ad3 100644 --- a/src/backend/catalog/indexing.c +++ b/src/backend/catalog/indexing.c @@ -167,6 +167,43 @@ CatalogIndexInsert(CatalogIndexState indstate, HeapTuple heapTuple) ExecDropSingleTupleTableSlot(slot); } +/* + * Subroutine to verify that catalog constraints are honored. + * + * Tuples inserted via CatalogTupleInsert/CatalogTupleUpdate are generally + * "hand made", so that it's possible that they fail to satisfy constraints + * that would be checked if they were being inserted by the executor. That's + * a coding error, so we only bother to check for it in assert-enabled builds. + */ +#ifdef USE_ASSERT_CHECKING + +static void +CatalogTupleCheckConstraints(Relation heapRel, HeapTuple tup) +{ + /* + * Currently, the only constraints implemented for system catalogs are + * attnotnull constraints. + */ + if (HeapTupleHasNulls(tup)) + { + TupleDesc tupdesc = RelationGetDescr(heapRel); + bits8 *bp = tup->t_data->t_bits; + + for (int attnum = 0; attnum < tupdesc->natts; attnum++) + { + Form_pg_attribute thisatt = TupleDescAttr(tupdesc, attnum); + + Assert(!(thisatt->attnotnull && att_isnull(attnum, bp))); + } + } +} + +#else /* !USE_ASSERT_CHECKING */ + +#define CatalogTupleCheckConstraints(heapRel, tup) ((void) 0) + +#endif /* USE_ASSERT_CHECKING */ + /* * CatalogTupleInsert - do heap and indexing work for a new catalog tuple * @@ -184,6 +221,8 @@ CatalogTupleInsert(Relation heapRel, HeapTuple tup) { CatalogIndexState indstate; + CatalogTupleCheckConstraints(heapRel, tup); + indstate = CatalogOpenIndexes(heapRel); simple_heap_insert(heapRel, tup); @@ -204,6 +243,8 @@ void CatalogTupleInsertWithInfo(Relation heapRel, HeapTuple tup, CatalogIndexState indstate) { + CatalogTupleCheckConstraints(heapRel, tup); + simple_heap_insert(heapRel, tup); CatalogIndexInsert(indstate, tup); @@ -225,6 +266,8 @@ CatalogTupleUpdate(Relation heapRel, ItemPointer otid, HeapTuple tup) { CatalogIndexState indstate; + CatalogTupleCheckConstraints(heapRel, tup); + indstate = CatalogOpenIndexes(heapRel); simple_heap_update(heapRel, otid, tup); @@ -245,6 +288,8 @@ void CatalogTupleUpdateWithInfo(Relation heapRel, ItemPointer otid, HeapTuple tup, CatalogIndexState indstate) { + CatalogTupleCheckConstraints(heapRel, tup); + simple_heap_update(heapRel, otid, tup); CatalogIndexInsert(indstate, tup);
pgsql-hackers by date: