Re: ExecRTCheckPerms() and many prunable partitions

From: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ExecRTCheckPerms() and many prunable partitions
Date: 2022-01-17 11:50:42
Message-ID: CA+HiwqEoL6fipwbOD9UouYEFUguG9kvxd+u6vkXSKjC9r+0zwA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 3:39 PM Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 12:10 PM Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 04:13:04PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > > Patch 0002 needed a rebase, because a conflicting change to
> > > expected/rules.out has since been committed.
> >
> > The cfbot reports new conflicts since about a week ago with this patch:
> > Could you send a rebased patch? In the meantime I'll switch the cf entry to
> > Waiting on Author.
>
> Turns out I had never compiled this patch set to exercise xml and lz4
> tests, whose output files contained view definitions shown using \d
> that also needed to be updated in the 0002 patch.
>
> Fixed in the attached updated version.

cfbot tells me it found a conflict when applying v7 on the latest
HEAD. Fixed in the attached v8.

--
Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment Content-Type Size
v8-0001-Rework-query-relation-permission-checking.patch application/octet-stream 150.6 KB
v8-0002-Do-not-add-hidden-OLD-NEW-RTEs-to-stored-view-rul.patch application/octet-stream 120.1 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Gustafsson 2022-01-17 12:26:33 Re: New developer papercut - Makefile references INSTALL
Previous Message Amit Langote 2022-01-17 11:40:54 Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?)