| From: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Matheus Alcantara <matheusssilv97(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de |
| Subject: | Re: REPACK (CONCURRENTLY) fails when table owner lacks CONNECT |
| Date: | 2026-08-27 20:50:27 |
| Message-ID: | CALj2ACVrKX9qjCxOqA0Mx-K=i-PUiRwTN=nNLBeyZ0BTsjf6fA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 12:52 PM Matheus Alcantara
<matheusssilv97(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 27/08/26 16:19, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > The patch looks reasonable to me.
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 03:55:11PM -0300, Matheus Alcantara wrote:
> >> Added this new test case on attached.
> >
> > I'm not sure the new tests are necessary. It seems unlikely that we'll
> > accidentally remove the flags down the road.
> >
>
> Yeah, I also think that is unlikely that we'll remove, I just put the
> test to be more conservative. I think that is good to have such tests
> to ensure that these bugs are not re-introduced but given that this
> seems a minor/oversight I'm not totally against not adding them.
> Attached is v3 without the tests.
Fair enough. If anyone feels differently later, we can always add them
to HEAD. The attached v3 patch looks good to me. pgindent and tests
are all happy.
--
Bharath Rupireddy
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mihail Nikalayeu | 2026-08-27 21:34:00 | Logical replication can lose an update after concurrent index invalidation |
| Previous Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2026-08-27 20:45:00 | Re: REPACK (CONCURRENTLY) doesn't check the table AM |