From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | GRANT/REVOKE take NO lock on the target object?! |
Date: | 2012-12-22 01:43:18 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYcQNaLTtyd52mPE7z2SvpzC+3mX86HZJMXNwLPdqrcZA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
S1:
rhaas=# create table foo (a int);
CREATE TABLE
rhaas=# begin;
BEGIN
rhaas=# lock foo;
LOCK TABLE
S2:
rhaas=# grant all on foo to public;
GRANT
rhaas=# revoke all on foo from public;
REVOKE
This seems quite obviously silly, given the amount of time and energy
we've spent worrying about ALTER TABLE lock levels. Note that
GRANT/REVOKE on a table do a not-in-place update of the pg_class row;
with anything less than an AccessExclusiveLock, the usual SnapshotNow
hazards exist: another session can fail to find the pg_class row
altogether.
[ Credit: Noah Misch helped me trace down the problem that led me to
this report. ]
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2012-12-22 01:48:59 | Re: Making view dump/restore safe at the column-alias level |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2012-12-22 01:03:53 | Re: Review of Row Level Security |