| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: predefined role(s) for VACUUM and ANALYZE |
| Date: | 2022-11-23 19:56:28 |
| Message-ID: | 0b00a6ff-1475-c0ba-15ec-5b5e381c6359@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2022-11-20 Su 11:57, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 10:50:04AM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> another rebase
> Another rebase for cfbot.
>
I have committed the first couple of these to get them out of the way.
But I think we need a bit of cleanup in the next patch.
vacuum_is_relation_owner() looks like it's now rather misnamed. Maybe
vacuum_is_permitted_for_relation()? Also I think we need a more thorough
reworking of the comments around line 566. And I think we need a more
detailed explanation of why the change in vacuum_rel is ok, and if it is
OK we should adjust the head comment on the function.
In any case I think this comment would be better English with "might"
instead of "may":
/* user may have the ANALYZE privilege */
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-11-23 20:04:22 | Re: fixing CREATEROLE |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2022-11-23 19:50:10 | Re: drop postmaster symlink |