From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff Davis <jdavis(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pgsql: Fix search_path to a safe value during maintenance operations. |
Date: | 2023-06-10 00:49:00 |
Message-ID: | 053b43a9f80793a8f31467ba9de3db90518ab120.camel@j-davis.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2023-06-09 at 17:37 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> Attached a patch to mark those functions as PARALLEL UNSAFE, which
> fixes the problem.
On second thought, that might not be acceptable for amcheck, depending
on how its run.
I think it's OK if run by pg_amcheck, because that runs it on a single
index at a time in each connection, and parallelizes by opening more
connections.
But if some users are calling the check functions across many tables in
a single select statement (e.g. in the targetlist of a query on
pg_class), then they'll experience a regression.
> Alternatively, I could just take out that line, as those SQL
> functions
> are not controlled by the MAINTAIN privilege. But for consistency I
> think it's a good idea to leave it in so that index functions are
> called with the right search path for amcheck.
If marking them PARALLEL UNSAFE is not acceptable, then this seems like
a fine solution.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2023-06-10 01:04:52 | pgsql: doc: PG 16 relnotes, add author |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2023-06-10 00:37:57 | Re: pgsql: Fix search_path to a safe value during maintenance operations. |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2023-06-10 01:04:36 | Re: PG 16 draft release notes ready |
Previous Message | Gregory Smith | 2023-06-10 00:41:50 | Re: Use COPY for populating all pgbench tables |