We now create contype='n' pg_constraint rows for not-null constraints on
user tables. Only one such constraint is allowed for a column.
We propagate these constraints to other tables during operations such as
adding inheritance relationships, creating and attaching partitions and
creating tables LIKE other tables. These related constraints mostly
follow the well-known rules of conislocal and coninhcount that we have
for CHECK constraints, with some adaptations: for example, as opposed to
CHECK constraints, we don't match not-null ones by name when descending
a hierarchy to alter or remove it, instead matching by the name of the
column that they apply to. This means we don't require the constraint
names to be identical across a hierarchy.
The inheritance status of these constraints can be controlled: now we
can be sure that if a parent table has one, then all children will have
it as well. They can optionally be marked NO INHERIT, and then children
are free not to have one. (There's currently no support for altering a
NO INHERIT constraint into inheriting down the hierarchy, but that's a
desirable future feature.)
This also opens the door for having these constraints be marked NOT
VALID, as well as allowing UNIQUE+NOT NULL to be used for functional
dependency determination, as envisioned by commit e49ae8d3bc58. It's
likely possible to allow DEFERRABLE constraints as followup work, as
well.
psql shows these constraints in \d+, though we may want to reconsider if
this turns out to be too noisy. Earlier versions of this patch hid
constraints that were on the same columns of the primary key, but I'm
not sure that that's very useful. If clutter is a problem, we might be
better off inventing a new \d++ command and not showing the constraints
in \d+.
For now, we omit these constraints on system catalog columns, because
they're unlikely to achieve anything.
The main difference to the previous attempt at this (b0e96f311985) is
that we now require that such a constraint always exists when a primary
key is in the column; we didn't require this previously which had a
number of unpalatable consequences. With this requirement, the code is
easier to reason about. For example:
- We no longer have "throwaway constraints" during pg_dump. We needed
those for the case where a table had a PK without a not-null
underneath, to prevent a slow scan of the data during restore of the
PK creation, which was particularly problematic for pg_upgrade.
- We no longer have to cope with attnotnull being set spuriously in
case a primary key is dropped indirectly (e.g., via DROP COLUMN).
Some bits of code in this patch were authored by Jian He.
Author: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Author: Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>
Reviewed-by: 何建 (jian he) <jian.universality@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: 王刚 (Tender Wang) <tndrwang@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Reviewed-by: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/202408310358.sdhumtyuy2ht@alvherre.pgsql
As an optimization, we store "name" columns as cstrings in btree
indexes.
Here we modify it so that Index Only Scans convert these cstrings back
to names with NAMEDATALEN bytes rather than storing the cstring in the
tuple slot, as was happening previously.
Bug: #17855
Reported-by: Alexander Lakhin
Reviewed-by: Alexander Lakhin, Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17855-5f523e0f9769a566@postgresql.org
Backpatch-through: 12, all supported versions
Not much to say here: does what it says on the tin.
We steal a previously-always-zero bit from the nextOffset
field of leaf index tuples in order to track whether there
is a nulls bitmap. Otherwise it works about like included
columns in other index types.
Pavel Borisov, reviewed by Andrey Borodin and Anastasia Lubennikova,
and rather heavily editorialized on by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CALT9ZEFi-vMp4faht9f9Junb1nO3NOSjhpxTmbm1UGLMsLqiEQ@mail.gmail.com
Commit 29b64d1d mishandled skipping over truncated high key attributes
during row comparisons. The row comparison key matching loop would loop
forever when a truncated attribute was encountered for a row compare
subkey. Fix by following the example of other code in the loop: advance
the current subkey, or break out of the loop when the last subkey is
reached.
Add test coverage for the relevant _bt_check_rowcompare() code path.
The new test case is somewhat tied to nbtree implementation details,
which isn't ideal, but seems unavoidable.
Similarly to B-tree, GiST index access method gets support of INCLUDE
attributes. These attributes aren't used for tree navigation and aren't
present in non-leaf pages. But they are present in leaf pages and can be
fetched during index-only scan.
The point of having INCLUDE attributes in GiST indexes is slightly different
from the point of having them in B-tree. The main point of INCLUDE attributes
in B-tree is to define UNIQUE constraint over part of attributes enabled for
index-only scan. In GiST the main point of INCLUDE attributes is to use
index-only scan for attributes, whose data types don't have GiST opclasses.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/73A1A452-AD5F-40D4-BD61-978622FF75C1%40yandex-team.ru
Author: Andrey Borodin, with small changes by me
Reviewed-by: Andreas Karlsson
indxpath.c needs a good deal more attention for covering indexes than
it's gotten. But so far as I can tell, the only really awful breakage
is in expand_indexqual_rowcompare (nee adjust_rowcompare_for_index),
which was only half fixed in c266ed31a. The other problems aren't
bad enough to take the risk of a just-before-wrap fix.
The problem here is that if the leading column of a row comparison
matches an index (allowing this code to be reached), and some later
column doesn't match the index, it'll nonetheless believe that that
column matches the first included index column. Typically that'll
lead to an error like "operator M is not a member of opfamily N" as
a result of fetching a garbage opfamily OID. But with enough bad
luck, maybe a broken plan would be generated.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/25526.1549847928@sss.pgh.pa.us
This column was added in commit 8224de4f42cc ("Indexes with INCLUDE
columns and their support in B-tree") to ease writing the ruleutils.c
supporting code for that feature, but it turns out to be unnecessary --
we can do the same thing with just one more syscache lookup.
Even the documentation for the new column being removed in this commit
is awkward.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180902165018.33otxftp3olgtu4t@alvherre.pgsql
The multi-argument form of pg_get_indexdef() failed to print anything when
asked to print a single index column that is an included column rather than
a key column. This seems an unintentional result of someone having tried
to take a short-cut and use the attrsOnly flag for two different purposes.
To fix, split said flag into two flags, attrsOnly which suppresses
non-attribute info, and keysOnly which suppresses included columns.
Add a test case using psql's \d command, which relies on that function.
(It's mighty tempting at this point to replace pg_get_indexdef_worker's
mess of boolean flag arguments with a single bitmask-of-flags argument,
which would allow making the call sites much more self-documenting.
But I refrained for the moment.)
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/21724.1531943735@sss.pgh.pa.us
The initial version of the included-index-column feature stated that
included columns couldn't be the same as any key column of the index.
While it'd be pretty silly to do that, since the included column would be
entirely redundant, we've never prohibited redundant index columns before
so it's not very consistent to do so here. Moreover, the prohibition
was itself badly implemented, so that it failed to reject columns that
were effectively identical but not spelled quite alike, as reported by
Aditya Toshniwal.
(Moreover, it's not hard to imagine that for some non-btree index types,
such cases would be non-silly anyhow: the index might use a lossy
representation for key columns but be able to support retrieval of the
original form of included columns.)
Hence, let's just drop the prohibition.
In passing, do some copy-editing on the documentation for the
included-column feature.
Yugo Nagata; documentation and test corrections by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAM9w-_mhBCys4fQNfaiQKTRrVWtoFrZ-wXmDuE9Nj5y-Y7aDKQ@mail.gmail.com
Add several assertions that ensure that we're dealing with a pivot tuple
without non-key attributes where that's expected. Also, remove the
assertion within _bt_isequal(), restoring the v10 function signature. A
similar check will be performed for the page highkey within
_bt_moveright() in most cases. Also avoid dropping all objects within
regression tests, to increase pg_dump test coverage for INCLUDE indexes.
Rather than using infrastructure that's generally intended to be used
with reference counted heap tuple descriptors during truncation, use the
same function that was introduced to store flat TupleDescs in shared
memory (we use a temp palloc'd buffer). This isn't strictly necessary,
but seems more future-proof than the old approach. It also lets us
avoid including rel.h within indextuple.c, which was arguably a
modularity violation. Also, we now call index_deform_tuple() with the
truncated TupleDesc, not the source TupleDesc, since that's more robust,
and saves a few cycles.
In passing, fix a memory leak by pfree'ing truncated pivot tuple memory
during CREATE INDEX. Also pfree during a page split, just to be
consistent.
Refactor _bt_check_natts() to be more readable.
Author: Peter Geoghegan with some editorization by me
Reviewed by: Alexander Korotkov, Teodor Sigaev
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAH2-Wz%3DkCWuXeMrBCopC-tFs3FbiVxQNjjgNKdG2sHxZ5k2y3w%40mail.gmail.com
This patch introduces INCLUDE clause to index definition. This clause
specifies a list of columns which will be included as a non-key part in
the index. The INCLUDE columns exist solely to allow more queries to
benefit from index-only scans. Also, such columns don't need to have
appropriate operator classes. Expressions are not supported as INCLUDE
columns since they cannot be used in index-only scans.
Index access methods supporting INCLUDE are indicated by amcaninclude flag
in IndexAmRoutine. For now, only B-tree indexes support INCLUDE clause.
In B-tree indexes INCLUDE columns are truncated from pivot index tuples
(tuples located in non-leaf pages and high keys). Therefore, B-tree indexes
now might have variable number of attributes. This patch also provides
generic facility to support that: pivot tuples contain number of their
attributes in t_tid.ip_posid. Free 13th bit of t_info is used for indicating
that. This facility will simplify further support of index suffix truncation.
The changes of above are backward-compatible, pg_upgrade doesn't need special
handling of B-tree indexes for that.
Bump catalog version
Author: Anastasia Lubennikova with contribition by Alexander Korotkov and me
Reviewed by: Peter Geoghegan, Tomas Vondra, Antonin Houska, Jeff Janes,
David Rowley, Alexander Korotkov
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/56168952.4010101@postgrespro.ru
Output order from the pg_indexes view might vary depending on the
phase of the moon, so add ORDER BY to ensure stable results of tests
added by commit 386e3d7609c49505e079c40c65919d99feb82505.
Per buildfarm.
Now indexes (but only B-tree for now) can contain "extra" column(s) which
doesn't participate in index structure, they are just stored in leaf
tuples. It allows to use index only scan by using single index instead
of two or more indexes.
Author: Anastasia Lubennikova with minor editorializing by me
Reviewers: David Rowley, Peter Geoghegan, Jeff Janes
