From: | Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Prevent writes on large objects in read-only transactions |
Date: | 2022-06-29 08:29:50 |
Message-ID: | 20220629172950.86b9b60a09e5fb4865cb2dc6@sraoss.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello Michael-san,
Thank you for reviewing the patch. I attached the updated patch.
On Thu, 16 Jun 2022 17:31:22 +0900
Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> Looking at the docs of large objects, as of "Client Interfaces", we
> mention that any action must take place in a transaction block.
> Shouldn't we add a note that no write operations are allowed in a
> read-only transaction?
I added a description about read-only transaction to the doc.
> + if (mode & INV_WRITE)
> + PreventCommandIfReadOnly("lo_open() in write mode");
> Nit. This breaks translation. I think that it could be switched to
> "lo_open(INV_WRITE)" instead as the flag name is documented.
Changed it as you suggested.
> The patch is forgetting a refresh for largeobject_1.out.
I added changes for largeobject_1.out.
> --- INV_READ = 0x20000
> --- INV_WRITE = 0x40000
> +-- INV_READ = 0x40000
> +-- INV_WRITE = 0x20000
> Good catch! This one is kind of independent, so I have fixed it
> separately, in all the expected output files.
Thanks!
--
Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v3_prevent_lo_writes_in_readonly.patch | text/x-diff | 8.4 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jelte Fennema | 2022-06-29 09:02:56 | Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 compatibility |
Previous Message | Alexander Pyhalov | 2022-06-29 08:01:37 | Re: CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY on partitioned index |