Re: pg_signal_backend() asymmetry

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Subject: Re: pg_signal_backend() asymmetry
Date: 2012-09-26 20:54:43
Message-ID: 20120926205443.GA27074@tornado.leadboat.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I'm marking this patch Ready for Committer. I suggest backpatching it to 9.2;
the patch corrects an oversight in 9.2 changes. There's more compatibility
value in backpatching than in retaining distinct behavior for 9.2 only.

On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 09:32:41AM -0700, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> ! if (!superuser())
> {
> /*
> ! * Since the user is not superuser, check for matching roles.
> */
> ! if (proc->roleId != GetUserId())
> ! return SIGNAL_BACKEND_NOPERMISSION;
> }

I would have collapsed the conditionals and deleted the obvious comment:

if (!(superuser() || proc->roleId == GetUserId()))
return SIGNAL_BACKEND_NOPERMISSION;

The committer can do that if desired; no need for another version.

Thanks,
nm

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2012-09-26 20:56:52 Re: data to json enhancements
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2012-09-26 19:29:38 Re: pg_reorg in core?