generating the tuples has resjunk output columns.  This is not possible for
simple table scans but can happen when evaluating a whole-row Var for a view.
Per example from Patryk Kordylewski.  The problem exists back to 8.0 but
I'm not going to risk back-patching further than 8.2 because of the many
changes in this area.

tool chains).

"index" entries for GIN/GiST.

entire section, per Peter.

entries in textsearch.sgml.

processing routines.  Per Heikki.

older SGML toolchains.

sets for outer joins, in the light of bug #3588 and additional thought and
experimentation.  The original methodology was fatally flawed for nests of
more than two outer joins: it got the relationships between adjacent joins
right, but didn't always come to the right conclusions about whether a join
could be interchanged with one two or more levels below it.  This was largely
caused by a mistaken idea that we should use the min_lefthand + min_righthand
sets of a sub-join as the minimum left or right input set of an upper join
when we conclude that the sub-join can't commute with the upper one.  If
there's a still-lower join that the sub-join *can* commute with, this method
led us to think that that one could commute with the topmost join; which it
can't.  Another problem (not directly connected to bug #3588) was that
make_outerjoininfo's processing-order-dependent method for enforcing outer
join identity #3 didn't work right: if we decided that join A could safely
commute with lower join B, we dropped all information about sub-joins under B
that join A could perhaps not safely commute with, because we removed B's
entire min_righthand from A's.

To fix, make an explicit computation of all inner join combinations that occur
below an outer join, and add to that the full syntactic relsets of any lower
outer joins that we determine it can't commute with.  This method gives much
more direct enforcement of the outer join rearrangement identities, and it
turns out not to cost a lot of additional bookkeeping.

Thanks to Richard Harris for the bug report and test case.

case, per Florian Pflug.
Not back-patched since it's unclear that anyone but me still cares ...

to be more logical.

the main documentation, out of its own text search chapter.

checks for individual-table-size functions, since anyone in the database could
get approximate values from pg_class.relpages anyway.  Allow database-size to
users with CONNECT privilege for the target database (note that this is
granted by default).  Allow tablespace-size if the user has CREATE privilege
on the tablespace (which is *not* granted by default), or if the tablespace is
the default tablespace for the current database (since we treat that as
implicitly allowing use of the tablespace).

read from the temp file didn't match the file length reported by ftello(),
the wrong variable's value was printed, and so the message made no sense.
Clean up a couple other coding infelicities while at it.

restart point.  Per suggestion from Simon Riggs.

SELECT on the target table.  Per discussion.

even if the "deadlock detected" ERROR message is suppressed by an exception
catcher.  Be clearer about the event sequence when a soft deadlock is fixed:
the fixing process might or might not still have to wait, so log that
separately.  Fix race condition when someone releases us from the lock partway
through printing all this junk --- we'd not get confused about our state, but
the log message sequence could have been misleading, ie, a "still waiting"
message with no subsequent "acquired" message.  Greg Stark and Tom Lane.

section makes a little more sense.

corrections.  Not sure why these were not in CVS.  Researching.

fixes.  Not sure how these weren't comitted before.

pending decision on exactly what will happen with
contrib/tsearch2 now that it's in core.

namespace isn't necessarily first in the search path (there could be implicit
schemas ahead of it).  Examples are

test=# set search_path TO s1;

test=# create view pg_timezone_names as select * from pg_timezone_names();
ERROR:  "pg_timezone_names" is already a view

test=# create table pg_class (f1 int primary key);
ERROR:  permission denied: "pg_class" is a system catalog

You'd expect these commands to create the requested objects in s1, since
names beginning with pg_ aren't supposed to be reserved anymore.  What is
happening is that we create the requested base table and then execute
additional commands (here, CREATE RULE or CREATE INDEX), and that code is
passed the same RangeVar that was in the original command.  Since that
RangeVar has schemaname = NULL, the secondary commands think they should do a
path search, and that means they find system catalogs that are implicitly in
front of s1 in the search path.

This is perilously close to being a security hole: if the secondary command
failed to apply a permission check then it'd be possible for unprivileged
users to make schema modifications to system catalogs.  But as far as I can
find, there is no code path in which a check doesn't occur.  Which makes it
just a weird corner-case bug for people who are silly enough to want to
name their tables the same as a system catalog.

The relevant code has changed quite a bit since 8.2, which means this patch
wouldn't work as-is in the back branches.  Since it's a corner case no one
has reported from the field, I'm not going to bother trying to back-patch.

days that was obsolete the moment we had IN (SELECT ...) capability.
It's arguably a security hole since it applied no permissions check to
the table it searched, and since it was never documented anywhere,
removing it seems more appropriate than fixing it.

not all that exciting when the system catalogs are readable by all,
but some people try to lock them down, and would not like this sort of
end run ...

and pg_tablespace_size to superusers.  Perhaps we could weaken the first
case to just require SELECT privilege, but that doesn't work for the
other cases, so use ownership as the common concept.

While it's not clear that TID linkage info is of any great use to a
nefarious user, it's certainly unexpected that these functions wouldn't
insist on read privileges.

but no permissions check at all is certainly no good.)  Clean up usage
of some deprecated APIs.