From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Refactor recordExtObjInitPriv() |
Date: | 2023-01-12 17:40:49 |
Message-ID: | 20230112174049.GA2047702@nathanxps13 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 12:20:50PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>> On 12.01.23 01:04, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> - classoid == AggregateRelationId ||
>>> I noticed that AggregateRelationId isn't listed in the ObjectProperty
>>> array, so I think recordExtObjInitPriv() will begin erroring for that
>>> classoid instead of ignoring it like we do today.
>
>> Hmm, we do have some extensions in contrib that add aggregates (citext,
>> intagg). I suspect that the aggregate function is actually registered
>> into the extension via its pg_proc entry, so this wouldn't actually
>> matter. But maybe the commenting should be clearer?
>
> Yeah, I don't believe that AggregateRelationId is used in object
> addresses; we just refer to pg_proc for any kind of function including
> aggregates. Note that there is no "oid" column in pg_aggregate.
Got it, thanks for clarifying.
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2023-01-12 17:41:57 | Re: What object types should be in schemas? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-01-12 17:31:15 | Re: on placeholder entries in view rule action query's range table |