Re: [HACKERS] replace GrantObjectType with ObjectType

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] replace GrantObjectType with ObjectType
Date: 2017-12-15 19:10:45
Message-ID: CA+TgmoazavRw_S913cNMdNeLV3SBgfU-em5fttSfQJZnd0JPuQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 12/14/17 22:59, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
>> I noted that no_priv_msg and not_owner_msg array been removed
>> and code fitted the code into aclcheck_error(). Actually that
>> makes the code more complex then what it used to be. I would
>> prefer the array rather then code been fitted into the function.
>
> There is an argument for having a big array versus the switch/case
> approach. But most existing code around object addresses uses the
> switch/case approach, so it's better to align it that way, I think.
> It's weird to have to maintain two different styles.

Eh, really? What about the two big arrays at the top of objectaddress.c?

(This is just a drive-by comment; I haven't looked at the details of
this patch.)

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2017-12-15 19:15:47 Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix freezing of a dead HOT-updated tuple
Previous Message Jeff Janes 2017-12-15 19:10:11 Re: Top-N sorts verses parallelism