Re: Some coverage for DROP OWNED BY with pg_default_acl

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Some coverage for DROP OWNED BY with pg_default_acl
Date: 2021-01-19 20:49:03
Message-ID: 20210119204903.GA5891@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2021-Jan-19, Michael Paquier wrote:

> And while reviewing the thing, I have spotted that there is a specific
> path for pg_default_acl in RemoveRoleFromObjectACL() that has zero
> coverage. This can be triggered with DROP OWNED BY, and it is
> actually safe to run as long as this is done in a separate transaction
> to avoid any interactions with parallel regression sessions.
> privileges.sql already has similar tests, so I'd like to add some
> coverage as per the attached (the duplicated role name is wanted).

Heh, interesting case. Added coverage is good, so +1.
Since the role regress_priv_user2 is "private" to the privileges.sql
script, there's no danger of a concurrent test getting the added lines
in trouble AFAICS.

> +SELECT count(*) FROM pg_shdepend
> + WHERE deptype = 'a' AND
> + refobjid = 'regress_priv_user2'::regrole AND
> + classid = 'pg_default_acl'::regclass;
> + count
> +-------
> + 5
> +(1 row)

Shrug. Seems sufficient.

Álvaro Herrera Valdivia, Chile

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2021-01-19 20:54:38 Re: [PATCH 1/1] Fix detection of pwritev support for OSX.
Previous Message Robert Haas 2021-01-19 20:45:03 Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY