1. 10 Feb, 2020 10 commits
  2. 09 Feb, 2020 2 commits
  3. 07 Feb, 2020 12 commits
  4. 06 Feb, 2020 7 commits
  5. 05 Feb, 2020 5 commits
  6. 04 Feb, 2020 3 commits
    • Thomas Munro's avatar
      Handle lack of DSM slots in parallel btree build, take 2. · d9fe702a
      Thomas Munro authored
      Commit 74618e77 added a new check intended to fix a bug, but put
      it in the wrong place so that parallel btree build was always
      disabled.  Do the check after we've actually tried to create
      a DSM segment.  Back-patch to 11, like the earlier commit.
      
      Reviewed-by: Peter Geoghegan
      Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-WzmDABkJzrNnvf%2BOULK-_A_j9gkYg_Dz-H62jzNv4eKQTw%40mail.gmail.com
      d9fe702a
    • Tom Lane's avatar
      Fix handling of "Subplans Removed" field in EXPLAIN output. · 7d91b604
      Tom Lane authored
      Commit 499be013 added this field in a rather poorly-thought-through
      manner, with the result being that rather than being a field of the
      Append or MergeAppend plan node as intended (and as it seems to be,
      in text format), it was actually an element of the "Plans" subgroup.
      At least in JSON format, that's flat out invalid syntax, because
      "Plans" is an array not an object.
      
      While it's not hard to move the generation of the field so that it
      appears where it's supposed to, this does result in a visible change
      in field order in text format, in cases where a Append or MergeAppend
      plan node has any InitPlans attached.  That's slightly annoying to
      do in stable branches; but the alternative of continuing to emit
      broken non-text formats seems worse.
      
      Also, since the set of fields emitted is not supposed to be
      data-dependent in non-text formats, make sure that "Subplans Removed"
      appears in Append and MergeAppend nodes even when it's zero, in those
      formats.  (The previous coding made it look like it could appear in
      some other node types such as BitmapAnd, but we don't actually support
      runtime pruning there, so don't emit it in those cases.)
      
      Per bug #16171 from Mahadevan Ramachandran.  Fix by Daniel Gustafsson
      and Tom Lane, reviewed by Hamid Akhtar.  Back-patch to v11 where this
      code came in.
      
      Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16171-b72259ab75505fa2@postgresql.org
      7d91b604
    • Michael Paquier's avatar
      Fix fuzzy error handling in pg_basebackup when opening gzFile · 177be9ed
      Michael Paquier authored
      First, this code did not bother checking for a failure when calling
      dup().  Then, per zlib, gzerror() returns NULL for a NULL input, which
      can happen if passing down to gzdopen() an invalid file descriptor or if
      there was an allocation failure.
      
      No back-patch is done as this would unlikely be a problem in the field.
      
      Per Coverity.
      
      Reported-by: Tom Lane
      177be9ed
  7. 03 Feb, 2020 1 commit