From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Neil Chen <carpenter(dot)nail(dot)cz(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Boris P(dot) Korzun" <drtr0jan(at)yandex(dot)ru>, "pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Inconsistent behavior of pg_dump/pg_restore on DEFAULT PRIVILEGES |
Date: | 2021-10-19 03:19:12 |
Message-ID: | 1737876.1634613552@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I've looked at the patch proposed you proposed. If we can depend on
> acldefault() being STRICT (which is legitimate to me), I think we
> don't need to build an expression depending on the caller (i.g.,
> is_default_acl). If acldefault() were to become not STRICT, we could
> detect it by regression tests. What do you think?
FWIW, I'm working on a refactoring of this logic that will bring the
acldefault() call into the getDefaultACLs code, which would mean that
we won't need that assumption anymore anyway. The code as I have it
produces SQL like
acldefault(CASE WHEN defaclobjtype = 'S'
THEN 's'::"char" ELSE defaclobjtype END, defaclrole) AS acldefault
and we could wrap the test-for-zero around that:
CASE WHEN defaclnamespace = 0 THEN
acldefault(CASE WHEN defaclobjtype = 'S'
THEN 's'::"char" ELSE defaclobjtype END, defaclrole)
ELSE NULL END AS acldefault
(although I think it might be better to write ELSE '{}' not ELSE NULL).
So I think we don't need to worry about whether acldefault() will stay
strict. This patch will only need to work in the back branches.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bossart, Nathan | 2021-10-19 03:54:37 | Re: Inconsistent behavior of pg_dump/pg_restore on DEFAULT PRIVILEGES |
Previous Message | Bossart, Nathan | 2021-10-19 03:07:51 | Re: BUG #17220: ALTER INDEX ALTER COLUMN SET (..) with an optionless opclass makes index and table unusable |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-10-19 03:37:56 | Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-10-19 03:15:47 | Re: Data is copied twice when specifying both child and parent table in publication |