| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460) |
| Date: | 2009-12-19 02:48:15 |
| Message-ID: | 16835.1261190895@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Oh. This is more complicated than it appeared on the surface. It
> seems that the string "BLOB COMMENTS" actually gets inserted into
> custom dumps somewhere, so I'm not sure whether we can just change it.
> Was this issue discussed at some point before this was committed?
> Changing it would seem to require inserting some backward
> compatibility code here. Another option would be to add a separate
> section for "BLOB METADATA", and leave "BLOB COMMENTS" alone. Can
> anyone comment on what the Right Thing To Do is here?
The BLOB COMMENTS label is, or was, correct for what it contained.
If this patch has usurped it to contain other things I would argue
that that is seriously wrong. pg_dump already has a clear notion
of how to handle ACLs for objects. ACLs for blobs ought to be
made to fit into that structure, not dumped in some random place
because that saved a few lines of code.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-12-19 02:51:52 | Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460) |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-12-19 02:01:30 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow read only connections during recovery, known as Hot |