| From: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ExecRTCheckPerms() and many prunable partitions |
| Date: | 2022-12-07 07:01:18 |
| Message-ID: | CA+HiwqGTzVrrJzxhXWZ=n-jMRV-8H+t939v+DA6p-YYZe59kzA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 12:19 AM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> I have pushed this finally.
Thanks a lot.
> I made two further changes:
>
> 1. there was no reason to rename ExecCheckPerms_hook, since its
> signature was changing anyway. I reverted it to the original name.
Sure, that makes sense.
> 2. I couldn't find any reason to expose ExecGetRTEPermissionInfo, and
> given that it's a one-line function, I removed it.
>
> Maybe you had a reason to add ExecGetRTEPermissionInfo, thinking about
> external callers; if so please discuss it.
My thinking was that it might be better to have a macro/function that
takes EState, not es_rteperminfos, from the callers. Kind of like how
there is exec_rt_fetch(). Though, that is only a cosmetic
consideration, so I don't want to insist.
> I'll mark this commitfest entry as committed soon; please post the other
> two patches you had in this series in a new thread.
Will do, thanks.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Smith | 2022-12-07 07:12:36 | Re: PGDOCS - Logical replication GUCs - added some xrefs |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2022-12-07 06:19:39 | Re: Question regarding "Make archiver process an auxiliary process. commit" |