| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Parallel worker error |
| Date: | 2017-09-08 09:43:47 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmobsn0xYj5osCKNpEDCJ5ccHMOo=kC3HojJbUjzhFZqusw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> You are right. I have changed the ordering and passed OuterUserId via
> FixedParallelState.
This looks a little strange:
+ SetCurrentRoleId(fps->outer_user_id, fps->is_current_user_superuser);
The first argument says "outer" but the second says "current". I'm
wondering if we can just make the second one is_superuser.
I'm also wondering if, rather than using GetConfigOptionByName, we
should just make the GUC underlying is_superuser non-static and use
the value directly. If not, then I'm alternatively wondering whether
we should maybe use a less-generic name than varval.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Khandekar | 2017-09-08 09:51:06 | Re: UPDATE of partition key |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-09-08 09:36:54 | Re: Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables |