postgres.git / summary / log / commit / refs
commit ca08ea52bfbc0e02eb7e866bb05bf166f15c9b75
Author: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu Sep 12 22:29:18 2019 +0000
First released in: 13.0, 9.4.25, 9.5.20, 9.6.16, 10.11, 11.6, 12.0
Fix usage of whole-row variables in WCO and RLS policy expressions.
Since WITH CHECK OPTION was introduced, ExecInitModifyTable has
initialized WCO expressions with the wrong plan node as parent -- that is,
it passed its input subplan not the ModifyTable node itself. Up to now
we thought this was harmless, but bug #16006 from Vinay Banakar shows it's
not: if the input node is a SubqueryScan then ExecInitWholeRowVar can get
confused into doing the wrong thing. (The fact that ExecInitWholeRowVar
contains such logic is certainly a horrid kluge that doesn't deserve to
live, but figuring out another way to do that is a task for some other day.)
Andres had already noticed the wrong-parent mistake and fixed it in commit
148e632c0, but not being aware of any user-visible consequences, he quite
reasonably didn't back-patch. This patch is simply a back-patch of
148e632c0, plus addition of a test case based on bug #16006. I also added
the test case to v12/HEAD, even though the bug is already fixed there.
Back-patch to all supported branches. 9.4 lacks RLS policies so the
new test case doesn't work there, but I'm pretty sure a test could be
devised based on using a whole-row Var in a plain WITH CHECK OPTION
condition. (I lack the cycles to do so myself, though.)
Andres Freund and Tom Lane
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16006-99290d2e4642cbd5@postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181205225213.hiwa3kgoxeybqcqv@alap3.anarazel.de
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 2 +-
src/test/regress/expected/updatable_views.out | 28 +++++++++++++--------------
2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 9fb2ea17775..b6d32c92911 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -1198,7 +1198,7 @@ ExecInitModifyTable(ModifyTable *node, EState *estate, int eflags)
{
WithCheckOption *wco = (WithCheckOption *) lfirst(ll);
ExprState *wcoExpr = ExecInitExpr((Expr *) wco->qual,
- mtstate->mt_plans[i]);
+ &mtstate->ps);
wcoExprs = lappend(wcoExprs, wcoExpr);
}
diff --git a/src/test/regress/expected/updatable_views.out b/src/test/regress/expected/updatable_views.out
index 1393dbc5c5c..dffdaa1ee03 100644
--- a/src/test/regress/expected/updatable_views.out
+++ b/src/test/regress/expected/updatable_views.out
@@ -1604,31 +1604,31 @@ UPDATE rw_view1 SET a = a + 5; -- should fail
ERROR: new row violates WITH CHECK OPTION for view "rw_view1"
DETAIL: Failing row contains (15).
EXPLAIN (costs off) INSERT INTO rw_view1 VALUES (5);
- QUERY PLAN
----------------------------------------------------------------
+ QUERY PLAN
+---------------------------------------------------------
Insert on base_tbl b
-> Result
- SubPlan 1
- -> Index Only Scan using ref_tbl_pkey on ref_tbl r
- Index Cond: (a = b.a)
- SubPlan 2
- -> Seq Scan on ref_tbl r_1
+ SubPlan 1
+ -> Index Only Scan using ref_tbl_pkey on ref_tbl r
+ Index Cond: (a = b.a)
+ SubPlan 2
+ -> Seq Scan on ref_tbl r_1
(7 rows)
EXPLAIN (costs off) UPDATE rw_view1 SET a = a + 5;
- QUERY PLAN
------------------------------------------------------------------
+ QUERY PLAN
+-----------------------------------------------------------
Update on base_tbl b
-> Hash Semi Join
Hash Cond: (b.a = r.a)
-> Seq Scan on base_tbl b
-> Hash
-> Seq Scan on ref_tbl r
- SubPlan 1
- -> Index Only Scan using ref_tbl_pkey on ref_tbl r_1
- Index Cond: (a = b.a)
- SubPlan 2
- -> Seq Scan on ref_tbl r_2
+ SubPlan 1
+ -> Index Only Scan using ref_tbl_pkey on ref_tbl r_1
+ Index Cond: (a = b.a)
+ SubPlan 2
+ -> Seq Scan on ref_tbl r_2
(11 rows)
DROP TABLE base_tbl, ref_tbl CASCADE;
[parent: 1f705e68ee4f]