| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com> |
| Cc: | KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Label switcher function |
| Date: | 2010-11-19 14:50:26 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTi=tgi6RgRkGQavetN2kZGWhBELJ77-ujtOH7Umh@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2010/11/19 KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>:
> Indeed, the comment at middle of the fmgr_info_cxt_security() and just
> above definition of the fmgr_security_definer() are not correct.
> Did you notice anything else?
I think I noticed a couple of places, but I didn't write down exactly
which ones. Sorry....
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2010-11-19 14:51:17 | Re: Latches with weak memory ordering (Re: max_wal_senders must die) |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2010-11-19 14:50:06 | Re: Latches with weak memory ordering (Re: max_wal_senders must die) |