Re: Latest patches break one of our unit-test, related to RLS

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Cc: Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Latest patches break one of our unit-test, related to RLS
Date: 2025-09-13 21:00:20
Message-ID: 296006.1757797220@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> writes:
> I came up with the attached patch set.

I did some more work on the comments, adjusted a couple of places that
could be simplified, and pushed it.

> I used two separate patches for clarity and ease of review, but both
> should get backpatched.

I didn't really love the "fix it and then explain it afterward"
approach. It's hard to review a patch if you don't understand the
logic. I considered swapping the order of the two patches, but
eventually just merged them into one.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Laurenz Albe 2025-09-13 22:38:10 Re: Latest patches break one of our unit-test, related to RLS
Previous Message Laurenz Albe 2025-09-13 09:11:42 Re: Latest patches break one of our unit-test, related to RLS