release-23.1: colexec: fix type schema corruption in an edge case

[blathers-crl]

Backport 1/1 commits from #133624 on behalf of @yuzefovich.

/cc @cockroachdb/release

---

This commit fixes type schema corruption in the vectorized engine in an edge case. In particular, consider the following circumstances:

• during the physical planning, when creating a new stage of processors, we often reuse the same type slice (stored in
  InputSyncSpec.ColumnTypes) that we get from the previous stage. In other words, we might have memory aliasing, but only on the gateway node because the remote nodes get their specs deserialized and each has its own memory allocation.
• throughout the vectorized operator planning, as of 85fd4fb, for each newly projected vector we append the corresponding type to the type slice we have in scope. We also capture intermediate state of the type slice by some operators (e.g. BatchSchemaSubsetEnforcer).
• as expected, when appending a type to the slice, if there is enough capacity, we reuse it, meaning that we often append to the slice that came to us via InputSyncSpec.ColumnTypes.
• now, if we have two stages of processors that happened to share the same underlying type slice with some free capacity AND we needed to append vectors for each stage, then we might corrupt the type schema captured by an operator for the earlier stage when performing vectorized planning for the later stage.

The bug is effectively the same as the comment deleted by 85fd4fb outlined:

// As an example, consider the following scenario in the context of
// planFilterExpr method:
// 1. r.ColumnTypes={types.Bool} with len=1 and cap=4
// 2. planSelectionOperators adds another types.Int column, so
//    filterColumnTypes={types.Bool, types.Int} with len=2 and cap=4
//    Crucially, it uses exact same underlying array as r.ColumnTypes
//    uses.
// 3. we project out second column, so r.ColumnTypes={types.Bool}
// 4. later, we add another types.Float column, so
//    r.ColumnTypes={types.Bool, types.Float}, but there is enough
//    capacity in the array, so we simply overwrite the second slot
//    with the new type which corrupts filterColumnTypes to become
//    {types.Bool, types.Float}, and we can get into a runtime type
//    mismatch situation.

The only differences are:

• aliasing of the type slice occurs via the InputSyncSpec.ColumnTypes that is often used as the starting points for populating NewColOperatorResult.ColumnTypes which is used throughout the vectorized operator planning
• columns are "projected out" by sharing the type schema between two stages of DistSQL processors.

This commit addresses this issue by capping the slice to its length right before we get into the vectorized planning. This will make it so that if we need to append a type, then we'll make a fresh allocation, and any possible memory aliasing with a different stage of processors will be gone.

I haven't quite figured out the exact conditions that are needed for this bug to occur, but my intuition says that it should be quite rare in practice (otherwise we'd have seen this much sooner given that the offending commit was merged more than a year ago and was backported to older branches).

Fixes: #130402.

Release note (bug fix): Previously, CockroachDB could encounter an internal error of the form interface conversion: coldata.Column is in an edge case and this is now fixed. The bug is present in versions 22.2.13+, 23.1.9+, 23.2+.

---

Release justification: bug fix.

[blathers-crl]

Thanks for opening a backport.

Please check the backport criteria before merging:

• Backports should only be created for serious
  issues or test-only changes.
• Backports should not break backwards-compatibility.
• Backports should change as little code as possible.
• Backports should not change on-disk formats or node communication protocols.
• Backports should not add new functionality (except as defined
  here).
• Backports must not add, edit, or otherwise modify cluster versions; or add version gates.
• All backports must be reviewed by the owning areas TL. For more information as to how that review should be conducted, please consult the backport
  policy.

If your backport adds new functionality, please ensure that the following additional criteria are satisfied:

• There is a high priority need for the functionality that cannot wait until the next release and is difficult to address in another way.
• The new functionality is additive-only and only runs for clusters which have specifically “opted in” to it (e.g. by a cluster setting).
• New code is protected by a conditional check that is trivial to verify and ensures that it only runs for opt-in clusters. State changes must be further protected such that nodes running old binaries will not be negatively impacted by the new state (with a mixed version test added).
• The PM and TL on the team that owns the changed code have signed off that the change obeys the above rules.
• Your backport must be accompanied by a post to the appropriate Slack
  channel (#db-backports-point-releases or #db-backports-XX-X-release) for awareness and discussion.

Also, please add a brief release justification to the body of your PR to justify this
backport.

[cockroach-teamcity]

This change is 

[mgartner]

Reviewed 2 of 2 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! 1 of 0 LGTMs obtained (waiting on @blathers-crl[bot], @DrewKimball, and @yuzefovich)

---

pkg/sql/logictest/testdata/logic_test/vectorize_types line 195 at r1 (raw file):

);
INSERT INTO abcdef (a, b, c, d, e, f) VALUES ('a', 0, 0, 0, 'e', 'f');
CREATE TABLE ghijkl (

nit: Anecdotally, multiple DDL statements in the same statement ok directive leads to flaky tests. Maybe that's been addressed recently, but I've gotten in the habit of breaking them into multiple statement oks.

[yuzefovich]

Reviewable status: complete! 0 of 0 LGTMs obtained (and 1 stale) (waiting on @DrewKimball and @mgartner)

---

pkg/sql/logictest/testdata/logic_test/vectorize_types line 195 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, mgartner (Marcus Gartner) wrote…

nit: Anecdotally, multiple DDL statements in the same statement ok directive leads to flaky tests. Maybe that's been addressed recently, but I've gotten in the habit of breaking them into multiple statement oks.

Ack, I adjusted all backports but will keep the master unchanged - let's see whether anything comes up there :)

[dt]

I'm seeing data races on release branches due to this modifying the plan. Are plans expected to be immutable?

[yuzefovich]

Thanks for flagging! I don't think we have an explicit contract / comments about whether the physical plan can be modified or not, but in practice it is assumed. I'll add a comment in the fix.