From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Remove old RULE privilege completely |
Date: | 2024-09-09 17:45:37 |
Message-ID: | e3879ff1-9236-489d-81d2-7e211c8948ef@oss.nttdata.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2024/09/10 1:02, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 10:37 AM Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> wrote:
>> In v8.2, the RULE privilege for tables was removed, but for backward compatibility,
>> GRANT/REVOKE RULE, has_table_privilege(..., 'RULE') etc are still accepted,
>> though they don't perform any actions.
>>
>> Do we still need to maintain this backward compatibility?
>> Could we consider removing the RULE privilege entirely?
>
> 8.2 is a long time ago. If it's really been dead since then, I think
> we should remove it.
Ok, so, patch attached.
There was a test to check if has_table_privilege() accepted the keyword RULE.
The patch removed it since it's now unnecessary and would only waste cycles
testing that has_table_privilege() no longer accepts the keyword.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v1-0001-Remove-old-RULE-privilege-completely.patch | text/plain | 4.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-09-09 17:48:36 | Re: Remove hardcoded hash opclass function signature exceptions |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2024-09-09 17:25:02 | Re: access numeric data in module |