| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joseph Koshakow <koshy44(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: Wrong security context for deferred triggers? |
| Date: | 2024-07-08 12:36:45 |
| Message-ID: | a9c18c43-dbd8-4a5a-b665-29abe6828c70@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 7/8/24 04:14, Joseph Koshakow wrote:
> Given the above and the fact that the patch is a breaking change, my
> vote would still be to keep the current behavior and update the
> documentation. Though I'd be happy to be overruled by someone with more
> knowledge of triggers.
Thanks for that feedback.
Based on that, the patch should be rejected.
Since there were a couple of other opinions early in the thread, I'll let
it sit like that for now, and judgement can be passed at the end of the
commitfest. Perhaps somebody else wants to chime in.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-07-08 12:44:27 | Re: Is it expected behavior index only scan shows "OPERATOR(pg_catalog." for EXPLAIN? |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2024-07-08 12:32:01 | Re: Improving the latch handling between logical replication launcher and worker processes. |