Re: Improving RLS planning

Tom,

* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> > * Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> >> Here's an updated version of the RLS planning patch that gets rid of
> >> the incorrect interaction with Query.hasRowSecurity and adjusts
> >> terminology as agreed.
>
> > I've spent a fair bit of time going over this change to understand it,
> > how it works, and how it changes the way RLS and securiy barrier views
> > work.
>
> Thanks for the review. Attached is an updated patch that I believe
> addresses all of the review comments so far. The code is unchanged from
> v2, but I improved the README, some comments, and the regression tests.

I've reviewed your updates and they answer all of my comments and I
appreciate the EC regression tests you added.

I also agree with Dean's down-thread suggested regression test change.

Thanks!

Stephen