From: | Vaishnavi Prabakaran <vaishnaviprabakaran(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Simplify ACL handling for large objects and removal of superuser() checks |
Date: | 2017-09-26 02:42:23 |
Message-ID: | CAOoUkxT0ent8qDuKqnz=uD92hc9TayNRA+O8449b8ToXCo34jQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 11:45 AM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com
> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Vaishnavi Prabakaran
> <vaishnaviprabakaran(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Yes, I did realize on further reading the patch and what led to the
> > confusion is that in the 3rd patch , updated documentation(copied below)
> > still says that reading from a descriptor opened with INV_WRITE is
> possible.
> > I think we need some correction here to reflect the modified code
> behavior.
> >
> > + or other transactions. Reading from a descriptor opened with
> > + <symbol>INV_WRITE</symbol> or <symbol>INV_READ</> <literal>|</>
> > + <symbol>INV_WRITE</symbol> returns data that reflects all writes of
> > + other committed transactions as well as writes of the current
> > + transaction.
>
> Indeed, you are right. There is an error here. This should read as
> "INV_READ | INV_WRITE" only. Using "INV_WRITE" implies that reads
> cannot happen.
>
>
Thanks for correcting.
I moved the cf entry to "ready for committer", and though my vote is
for keeping
the existing API behavior with write implying read, I let the committer
decide whether the following behavior change is Ok or not.
"Reading from a large-object descriptor opened with INV_WRITE is NOT
possible"
Thanks & Regards,
Vaishnavi
Fujitsu Australia.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-09-26 02:44:09 | Re: Simplify ACL handling for large objects and removal of superuser() checks |
Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2017-09-26 02:39:38 | Re: Built-in plugin for logical decoding output |