Re: Simplify ACL handling for large objects and removal of superuser() checks

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Vaishnavi Prabakaran <vaishnaviprabakaran(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Simplify ACL handling for large objects and removal of superuser() checks
Date: 2017-11-09 17:56:49
Message-ID: 7933.1510250209@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 6:05 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Another idea would be to invent a new external flag bit "INV_WRITE_ONLY",
>> so that people who wanted true write-only could get it, without breaking
>> backwards-compatible behavior. But I'm inclined to wait for some field
>> demand to show up before adding even that little bit of complication.

> Demand that may never show up, and the current behavior on HEAD does
> not receive any complains either. I am keeping the patch simple for
> now. That's less aspirin needed for everybody.

Looks good to me, pushed.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2017-11-09 17:58:19 Re: pageinspect option to forgo buffer locking?
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-11-09 17:55:30 Re: pageinspect option to forgo buffer locking?