Re: RangeVarGetRelid()

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: RangeVarGetRelid()
Date: 2011-12-16 00:04:20
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZ4APGRjX5WOfSBn2moR09Xnh_bL7CLbVcEu_Ds95sxPw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> It also seems my last explanation didn't convey the point.  Yes, nearly every
> command has a different set of permissions checks.  However, we don't benefit
> equally from performing each of those checks before acquiring a lock.
> Consider renameatt(), which checks three things: you must own the relation,
> the relation must be of a supported relkind, and the relation must not be a
> typed table.  To limit opportunities for denial of service, let's definitely
> perform the ownership check before taking a lock.  The other two checks can
> wait until we hold that lock.  The benefit of checking them early is to avoid
> making a careless relation owner wait for a lock before discovering the
> invalidity of his command.  That's nice as far as it goes, but let's not
> proliferate callbacks for such a third-order benefit.

I agree, but my point is that so far we have no callbacks that differ
only in that detail. I accept that we'd probably want to avoid that.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Kupershmidt 2011-12-16 00:36:10 Re: Patch to allow users to kill their own queries
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2011-12-15 23:42:07 Re: Moving more work outside WALInsertLock