From: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Use %u to print user mapping's umid and userid |
Date: | 2016-02-09 05:09:13 |
Message-ID: | CAFjFpRdAoQ3s1Rj8-kqLx09Ua93bmNhNdCUB5TpgfF2-MPv4rA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Sorry, I was wrong. For public user mapping userid is 0 (InvalidOid), which
is returned as is in UserMapping object. I confused InvalidOid with -1.
Sorry for the confusion.
On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> > Sorry to come to this late.
> > The userid being printed is from UserMapping. The new API
> > GetUserMappingById() allows an FDW to get user mapping by its OID. This
> API
> > is intended to be used by FDWs to fetch the user mapping inferred by the
> > core for given join between foreign relations. In such user mapping
> object
> > , userid may be -1 for a public user mapping.
>
> If that is actually how it works, it's broken and I'm going to insist
> on a redesign. There is nothing anywhere that says that 0xffffffff
> is not a valid OID.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Borodin | 2016-02-09 05:15:02 | [Proposal] Improvement of GiST page layout |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-02-09 04:51:30 | Re: Use %u to print user mapping's umid and userid |