Formerly, any member of a role could change the role's comment, as of
course could superusers; but holders of CREATEROLE privilege could not,
unless they were also members. This led to the odd situation that a
CREATEROLE holder could create a role but then could not comment on it.
It also seems a bit dubious to let an unprivileged user change his own
comment, let alone those of group roles he belongs to. So, change the
rule to be "you must be superuser to comment on a superuser role, or
hold CREATEROLE to comment on non-superuser roles". This is the same
as the privilege check for creating/dropping roles, and thus fits much
better with the rule for other object types, namely that only the owner
of an object can comment on it.
In passing, clean up the documentation for COMMENT a little bit.
Per complaint from Owen Jacobson and subsequent discussion.
In addition to the
all-foo-recurse: all-bar-recurse
dependencies that constraint the order of the rule execution, we need
install-foo-recurse: install-bar-recurse
dependencies in case one runs make install without a make all first,
as some people apparently do.
We really need an automated check for this ... and did VALIDATE really
need to become a keyword at all, rather than picking some other syntax
using existing keywords?
race condition where SummarizeOldestCommittedSxact() is called even though
another backend already cleared out all finished sxact entries. That's OK,
RegisterSerializableTransactionInt() can just retry getting a news xact
slot from the available-list when that happens.
Reported by YAMAMOTO Takashi, bug #5918.
contains newly-inserted tuples that according to our OldestXmin are not
yet visible to everyone. The value returned by GetOldestXmin() is conservative,
and it can move backwards on repeated calls, so if we see that contradiction
between the PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag and status of tuples on the page, we have to
assume it's because an earlier vacuum calculated a higher OldestXmin value,
and all the tuples really are visible to everyone.
We have received several reports of this bug, with the "PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag
was incorrectly set in relation ..." warning appearing in logs. We were
finally able to hunt it down with David Gould's help to run extra diagnostics
in an environment where this happened frequently.
Also reword the warning, per Robert Haas' suggestion, to not imply that the
PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag is necessarily at fault, as it might also be a symptom
of corruption on a tuple header.
Backpatch to 8.4, where the PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was introduced.
than doing it aggressively whenever the tail-XID pointer is advanced, because
this way we don't need to do it while holding SerializableXactHashLock.
This also fixes bug #5915 spotted by YAMAMOTO Takashi, and removes an
obsolete comment spotted by Kevin Grittner.
This improves reporting, as the error string now includes the actual
Python exception. As a side effect, this no longer sets the errcode to
ERRCODE_DATA_EXCEPTION, which might be considered a feature, as it's
not documented and not clear why iterator errors should be treated
differently.
Jan Urbański
periodically rescan the archive for new timelines, while waiting for new WAL
segments to arrive. This allows you to set up a standby server that follows
the TLI change if another standby server is promoted to master. Before this,
you had to restart the standby server to make it notice the new timeline.
This patch only scans the archive for TLI changes, it won't follow a TLI
change in streaming replication. That is much needed too, but it would be a
much bigger patch than I dare to sneak in this late in the release cycle.
There was discussion on improving the sanity checking of the WAL segments so
that the system would notice more reliably if the new timeline isn't an
ancestor of the current one, but that is not included in this patch.
Reviewed by Fujii Masao.
Seen with an older gcc version. I'm not sure these represent any real
risk factor, but still a bit scary. Anyway we have lots of other
volatile-marked variables in this code, so a couple more won't hurt.
If a standby is broadcasting reply messages and we have named
one or more standbys in synchronous_standby_names then allow
users who set synchronous_replication to wait for commit, which
then provides strict data integrity guarantees. Design avoids
sending and receiving transaction state information so minimises
bookkeeping overheads. We synchronize with the highest priority
standby that is connected and ready to synchronize. Other standbys
can be defined to takeover in case of standby failure.
This version has very strict behaviour; more relaxed options
may be added at a later date.
Simon Riggs and Fujii Masao, with reviews by Yeb Havinga, Jaime
Casanova, Heikki Linnakangas and Robert Haas, plus the assistance
of many other design reviewers.
Since this field is after a variable-length field, it can't simply be
accessed via the C struct for pg_index. Fortunately, the relcache already
did the dirty work of pulling the information out to where it can be
accessed easily, so this is a one-line fix.
Andres Freund
