From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pgsql: RLS refactoring |
Date: | 2015-09-15 22:00:02 |
Message-ID: | 20150915220002.GB3685@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> > RLS refactoring
>
> It looks to me like this changed the representation of stored rules, so it
> should have included a catversion bump. This is particularly relevant to
> the 9.5 branch where people already have alpha installations.
I had considererd if a bump was needed and figured it wasn't.
The WithCheckOption node which was changed doesn't ever end up in the
catalog, I don't believe; certainly not in pg_policy which just stores
the expressions which come from transformWhereClause, which haven't
changed.
I don't mind doing a bump if we feel it's necessary and maybe I'm
missing that there's a way to cause that node type to end up in the
catalog, but I don't think so, as we only ever build WithCheckOption
nodes in the rewriter.
Thanks!
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-09-15 22:16:55 | Re: pgsql: RLS refactoring |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-09-15 20:29:41 | Re: pgsql: RLS refactoring |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-09-15 22:16:55 | Re: pgsql: RLS refactoring |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-09-15 21:34:18 | Re: Can extension build own SGML document? |