Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: DROP OWNED again

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: DROP OWNED again
Date: 2005-11-19 00:59:04
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-patchespgsql-www
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
>   /*
> !  * Called to execute the utility commands GRANT and REVOKE.
> !  *
> !  * stmt may be a complete GrantStmt created by the parser, or it may be
> !  * missing the "objects" list and the "grantees" list.  In this case,
> !  * they are taken from the second and third parameters, respectively.
>    */
>   void
> ! ExecuteGrantStmt(GrantStmt *stmt, Oid object, Oid grantee)

This seems like a really ugly API.  What's so hard about expecting the
caller to construct a valid GrantStmt?

(I get the impression from a quick scan of the code that the comment
is a long way from telling the truth about what's really happening,

> + static void AlterConversionOwner_int(Relation rel, Oid conversionOid,
> + 									 Oid newOwnerId);

If these are supposed to mean "AlterConversionOwner_internal", please
spell them that way.  Sitting beside "AlterConversionOwner_oid", it
sure looks like the "int" is meant to be read as "integer".

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2005-11-19 22:55:15
Subject: Re: DROP OWNED again
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2005-11-18 19:54:30
Subject: DROP OWNED again

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2005-11-19 17:48:09
Subject: Re: drop if exists - first piece
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-11-18 23:49:03
Subject: Re: drop if exists - first piece

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group