Documentation of word_similarity() and strict_word_similarity() functions
contains some vague wordings which could confuse users.  This patch makes
those wordings more clear.  word_similarity() was introduced in PostgreSQL 9.6,
and corresponding part of documentation needs to be backpatched.

Author: Bruce Momjian, Alexander Korotkov
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180526165648.GB12510%40momjian.us
Backpatch: 9.6, where word_similarity() was introduced

The .git directory might contain perl files, as hooks, for example.
Since we have no control over these they should be excluded from things
like our perlcritic checks.

Per offline report from Mike Blackwell.

When vacuum processes a relation it uses the corresponding relcache
entry's relfrozenxid / relminmxid as a cutoff for when to remove
tuples etc. Unfortunately for nailed relations (i.e. critical system
catalogs) bugs could frequently lead to the corresponding relcache
entry being stale.

This set of bugs could cause actual data corruption as vacuum would
potentially not remove the correct row versions, potentially reviving
them at a later point.  After 699bf7d0 some corruptions in this vein
were prevented, but the additional error checks could also trigger
spuriously. Examples of such errors are:
  ERROR: found xmin ... from before relfrozenxid ...
and
  ERROR: found multixact ... from before relminmxid ...
To be caused by this bug the errors have to occur on system catalog
tables.

The two bugs are:

1) Invalidations for nailed relations were ignored, based on the
   theory that the relcache entry for such tables doesn't
   change. Which is largely true, except for fields like relfrozenxid
   etc.  This means that changes to relations vacuumed in other
   sessions weren't picked up by already existing sessions.  Luckily
   autovacuum doesn't have particularly longrunning sessions.

2) For shared *and* nailed relations, the shared relcache init file
   was never invalidated while running.  That means that for such
   tables (e.g. pg_authid, pg_database) it's not just already existing
   sessions that are affected, but even new connections are as well.
   That explains why the reports usually were about pg_authid et. al.

To fix 1), revalidate the rd_rel portion of a relcache entry when
invalid. This implies a bit of extra complexity to deal with
bootstrapping, but it's not too bad.  The fix for 2) is simpler,
simply always remove both the shared and local init files.

Author: Andres Freund
Reviewed-By: Alvaro Herrera
Discussion:
    https://postgr.es/m/20180525203736.crkbg36muzxrjj5e@alap3.anarazel.de
    https://postgr.es/m/CAMa1XUhKSJd98JW4o9StWPrfS=11bPgG+_GDMxe25TvUY4Sugg@mail.gmail.com
    https://postgr.es/m/CAKMFJucqbuoDRfxPDX39WhA3vJyxweRg_zDVXzncr6+5wOguWA@mail.gmail.com
    https://postgr.es/m/CAGewt-ujGpMLQ09gXcUFMZaZsGJC98VXHEFbF-tpPB0fB13K+A@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 9.3-

We normally use the default line mode in examples.

The previous wording suggested only Slony, and there are more options
available.

It might be impossible for this to cause a problem in non-debug builds,
since there'd be no opportunity for the relcache entry to get recycled
before the fetch.  It blows up nicely with -DRELCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE plus
valgrind, though.

Evidently introduced by careless refactoring in commit f0e44751.
Back-patch accordingly.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/27543.1528758304@sss.pgh.pa.us

Calling an external function while a pin-lock is held is a bad idea as
those are designed to be short-lived.  The stress of a first commit into
a large git history may contribute to that.

Reported-by: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180611164952.vmxdpdpirdtkdsz6@alap3.anarazel.de

We don't need two passes if we scan child partitions before parents,
as that way the children's present_parts are up to date before they're
needed.  I (tgl) think there's actually a bug being fixed here, for the
case of an intermediate partitioned table with no direct leaf children,
but haven't attempted to construct a test case to prove it.

David Rowley

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f-6GODRNgEtdPxCnAPme2h2hTztB6LmtfdmcYAAOE0kQg@mail.gmail.com

No code changes except for a couple of new Asserts.

David Rowley and Tom Lane

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f-6GODRNgEtdPxCnAPme2h2hTztB6LmtfdmcYAAOE0kQg@mail.gmail.com

Makes it look more similar to other ones, and avoids the need for
pluralization.

Starting with commit f0e44751, ExecConstraints was in charge of
running the partition constraint; commit 19c47e7c modified that so
that caller could request to skip that checking depending on some
conditions, but that commit and 15ce775f together introduced a small
bug there which caused ExecInsert to request skipping the constraint
check but have this not be honored -- in effect doing the check twice.
This could have been fixed in a very small patch, but on further
analysis of the involved function and its callsites, it turns out to be
simpler to give the responsibility of checking the partition constraint
fully to the caller, and return ExecConstraints to its original
(pre-partitioning) shape where it only checked tuple descriptor-related
constraints.  Each caller must do partition constraint checking on its
own schedule, which is more convenient after commit 2f178441 anyway.

Reported-by: David Rowley
Author: David Rowley, Álvaro Herrera
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote, Amit Khandekar, Simon Riggs
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f8w8+awsxgea8wt7_UX8qzOQ=Tm1LD+U1fHqBAkXxkW2w@mail.gmail.com

Also add a function that centralizes the logic for locating all our perl
files and use it in pgperlcritic and pgperltidy as well as the new
pgperlcheck.

The previous coding just ignored pruning constraints that compare a
partition key to a null-valued expression.  This is silly, since really
what we can do there is conclude that all partitions are rejected: the
pruning operator is known strict so the comparison must always fail.

This also fixes the logic to not ignore constisnull for a Const comparison
value.  That's probably an unreachable case, since the planner would
normally have simplified away a strict operator with a constant-null input.
But this code has no business assuming that.

David Rowley, per a gripe from me

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/26279.1528670981@sss.pgh.pa.us

Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/dff3d555-bea4-ac24-29b2-29521b9d08e8%402ndquadrant.com

Reported-by: Christopher Jones

A review of the code has showed up a couple of issues fixed by this
commit:
- Physical slots have been using the confirmed LSN position as a start
comparison point which is always 0/0, instead use the restart LSN
position (logical slots need to use the confirmed LSN position, which
was correct).
- The actual slot update was incorrect for both physical and logical
slots.  Physical slots need to use their restart_lsn as base comparison
point (confirmed_flush was used because of previous point), and logical
slots need to begin reading WAL from restart_lsn (confirmed_flush was
used as well), while confirmed_flush is compiled depending on the
decoding context and record read, and is the LSN position returned back
to the caller.
- Never return 0/0 if a slot cannot be advanced.  This way, if a slot is
advanced while the activity is idle, then the same position is returned
to the caller over and over without raising an error.  Instead return
the LSN the slot has been advanced to.  With repetitive calls, the same
position is returned hence caller can directly monitor the difference in
progress in bytes by doing simply LSN difference calculations, which
should be monotonic.

Note that as the slot is owned by the backend advancing it, then the
read of those fields is fine lock-less, while updates need to happen
while the slot mutex is held, so fix that on the way as well.  Other
locks for in-memory data of replication slots have been already fixed
previously.

Some of those issues have been pointed out by Petr and Simon during the
patch, while I noticed some of them after looking at the code.  This
also visibly takes of a recently-discovered bug causing assertion
failures which can be triggered by a two-step slot forwarding which
first advanced the slot to a WAL page boundary and secondly advanced it
to the latest position, say 'FF/FFFFFFF' to make sure that the newest
LSN is used as forward point.  It would have been nice to drop a test
for that, but the set of operators working on pg_lsn limits it, so this
is left for a future exercise.

Author: Michael Paquier
Reviewed-by: Petr Jelinek, Simon Riggs
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CANP8+jLyS=X-CAk59BJnsxKQfjwrmKicHQykyn52Qj-Q=9GLCw@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2840048a-1184-417a-9da8-3299d207a1d7%40postgrespro.ru

Use "subplan" rather than "subnode" to refer to the child plans of
a partitioning Append; this seems a bit more specific and hence
clearer.  Improve assorted comments.  No non-cosmetic changes.

David Rowley and Tom Lane

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFj8pRBjrufA3ocDm8o4LPGNye9Y+pm1b9kCwode4X04CULG3g@mail.gmail.com

These struct definitions were originally dropped into primnodes.h,
which is a poor choice since that's mainly intended for primitive
expression node types; these are not in that category.  What they
are is auxiliary info in Plan trees, so move them to plannodes.h.

For consistency, also relocate some related code that was apparently
placed with the aid of a dartboard.

There's no interesting code changes in this commit, just reshuffling.

David Rowley and Tom Lane

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFj8pRBjrufA3ocDm8o4LPGNye9Y+pm1b9kCwode4X04CULG3g@mail.gmail.com

The initial coding of the run-time-pruning feature only coped with cases
where the partition key(s) are compared to Params.  That is a bit silly;
we can allow it to work with any non-Var-containing stable expression, as
long as we take special care with expressions containing PARAM_EXEC Params.
The code is hardly any longer this way, and it's considerably clearer
(IMO at least).  Per gripe from Pavel Stehule.

David Rowley, whacked around a bit by me

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFj8pRBjrufA3ocDm8o4LPGNye9Y+pm1b9kCwode4X04CULG3g@mail.gmail.com

Reported-by: Erwin Brandstetter

While debugging issues on HEAD for the new slot forwarding feature of
Postgres 11, some monitoring of the code surrounding in-memory slot data
has proved that the lock handling may cause inconsistent data to be read
by read-only callers of slot functions, particularly
pg_get_replication_slots() which fetches data for the system view
pg_replication_slots, or modules looking directly at slot information.

The code paths involved in those problems concern logical decoding
initialization (down to 9.4) and WAL reservation for slots (new as of
10).

A set of comments documenting all the lock handlings, particularly the
dependency with LW locks for slots and the in_use flag as well as the
internal mutex lock is added, based on a suggested by Simon Riggs.

Some of the fixed code exists down to 9.4 where WAL decoding has been
introduced, but as those race conditions are really unlikely going to
happen as those concern code paths for slot and decoding creation, just
fix the problem on HEAD.

Author: Michael Paquier

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180528085747.GA27845@paquier.xyz

Make sure that we don't exceed MaxAllocSize when increasing the number of
buckets.  Perhaps later we'll remove that limit and use DSA_ALLOC_HUGE, but
for now just prevent further increases like the non-parallel code.  This
change avoids the error from bug report #15225.

Author: Thomas Munro
Reviewed-By: Tom Lane
Reported-by: Frits Jalvingh
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/152802081668.26724.16985037679312485972%40wrigleys.postgresql.org

Author: Daniel Gustafsson
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3747D478-41F9-439F-8074-AC81A5C76346@yesql.se

Also, fix the pg_settings view to display source filename and line
number when invoked by a pg_read_all_settings member.  This addition by
me (Álvaro).

Also, fix wording of the comment in GetConfigOption regarding the
restriction it implements, renaming the parameter for extra clarity.
Noted by Michaël.

These were all oversight in commit 25fff407; backpatch to pg10,
where that commit first appeared.

Author: Laurenz Albe
Reviewed-by: Michaël Paquier, Álvaro Herrera
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1519917758.6586.8.camel@cybertec.at

It's listed in --help, so it should be listed in the man page as well.

GetRunningTransactionData() should ignore VACUUM procs because in some
cases they are assigned xids. This could lead to holding back xmin via
the route of passing the xid to standby and then having that hold back
xmin on master via feedback.

Backpatch to 9.1 needed, but will only do so on supported versions.
Backpatch once proven on the buildfarm.

Reported-by: Greg Stark
Author: Simon Riggs
Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CANP8+jJBYt=4PpTfiPb0UrH1_iPhzsxKH5Op_Wec634F0ohnAw@mail.gmail.com

Author: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>

The 'orig_slot' argument was removed in commit c0a8ae7b, but that
commit forgot to update the comment.

Author: Amit Langote
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/194ac4bf-7b4a-c887-bf26-bc1a85ea995a@lab.ntt.co.jp

This bug causes a lseek() failure to be reported as a "could not open"
failure in the error message, muddling bug reports.  I introduced this
copy-and-pasteo in commit 78e12201.

Noticed while reviewing code for bug report #15221, from lily liang.  In
version 10 the affected function is only used by multixact.c and
commit_ts, and only in corner-case circumstances, neither of which are
involved in the reported bug (a pg_subtrans failure.)

Author: Álvaro Herrera

For clarity, precision, grammar.

Author: Justin Pryzby
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote, Álvaro Herrera
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180523213513.GM30060@telsasoft.com

This covers new fields in two outfuncs.c functions having no readfuncs.c
counterpart.  Thus, this changes only debugging output.