Re: Extend ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES for large objects

From: Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Extend ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES for large objects
Date: 2025-04-03 14:04:18
Message-ID: 20250403230418.f41b23d155f6c6cb3cebcd92@sraoss.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 2 Apr 2025 02:35:35 +0900
Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> wrote:

>
>
> On 2025/01/23 19:22, Yugo NAGATA wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 13:30:17 +0100
> > Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 2024-09-13 at 16:18 +0900, Yugo Nagata wrote:
> >>> I've attached a updated patch. The test is rewritten using has_largeobject_privilege()
> >>> function instead of calling loread & lowrite, which makes the test a bit simpler.
> >>> Thare are no other changes.
> >>
> >> When I tried to apply this patch, I found that it doesn't apply any
> >> more since commit f391d9dc93 renamed tab-complete.c to tab-complete.in.c.
> >>
> >> Attached is a rebased patch.
> >
> > Thank you for updating the patch!
> >
> >> I agree that large objects are a feature that should fade out (alas,
> >> the JDBC driver still uses it for BLOBs). But this patch is not big
> >> or complicated and is unlikely to create a big maintenance burden.
> >>
> >> So I am somewhat for committing it. It works as advertised.
> >> If you are fine with my rebased patch, I can mark it as "ready for
> >> committer". If it actually gets committed depends on whether there
> >> is a committer who thinks it worth the effort or not.
> >
> > I confirmed the patch and I am fine with it.
>
> I've started reviewing this patch since it's marked as "ready for committer".

Thank you for your reviewing this patch!

> I know of several systems that use large objects, and I believe
> this feature would be beneficial for them. Overall, I like the idea.
>
>
> The latest patch looks good to me. I just have one minor comment:
>
> > only the privileges for schemas, tables (including views and foreign
> > tables), sequences, functions, and types (including domains) can be
> > altered.
>
> In alter_default_privileges.sgml, this part should also mention large objects?

Agreed. I attached a updated patch.

Regards,
Yugo Nagata

--
Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>

Attachment Content-Type Size
v5-0001-Extend-ALTER-DEFAULT-PRIVILEGES-for-large-objects.patch text/x-diff 19.9 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2025-04-03 14:10:26 Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query
Previous Message Ilia Evdokimov 2025-04-03 13:56:52 Re: pull-up subquery if JOIN-ON contains refs to upper-query