Re: Broken lock management in policy.c.

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Broken lock management in policy.c.
Date: 2016-01-04 02:12:02
Message-ID: CAM3SWZSZJvWUYkjaKwDTn0c_zQx6PUpnYYnCL=ve6baMAnyMFA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 6:09 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Really? But the problem happens as a consequence of having a
>> subqueries within CREATE POLICY's USING quals
>
> If that's what we're talking about, let's say it in precisely that many
> words. With an example. The current text is 100% useless.

I agree that the text was unclear, and that that should be fixed,
because it's too complicated to expect anyone to understand this
without an example (indeed, that's why I used isolationtester to
explain the issue). My confusion was only about whether it was
understood that Stephen had fulfilled my request to document this
behavior.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-01-04 02:16:05 Re: 9.5 BLOCKER: regrole and regnamespace and quotes
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-01-04 02:09:03 Re: Broken lock management in policy.c.