Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460)

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>
Cc: Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, 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: 2010-02-03 15:20:52
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
2010/2/1 KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>:
> I again wonder whether we are on the right direction.

I believe the proposed approach is to dump blob metadata if and only
if you are also dumping blob contents, and to do all of this for data
dumps but not schema dumps.  That seems about right to me.

> Originally, the reason why we decide to use per blob toc entry was
> that "BLOB ACLS" entry needs a few exceptional treatments in the code.
> But, if we deal with "BLOB ITEM" entry as data contents, it will also
> need additional exceptional treatments.

But the new ones are less objectionable, maybe.


In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-02-03 15:21:25
Subject: Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL
Previous:From: Chris CampbellDate: 2010-02-03 15:20:04
Subject: Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group