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

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 11:45 AM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com
> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Vaishnavi Prabakaran
> <vaishnaviprabakaran(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Yes, I did realize on further reading the patch and what led to the
> > confusion is that in the 3rd patch , updated documentation(copied below)
> > still says that reading from a descriptor opened with INV_WRITE is
> possible.
> > I think we need some correction here to reflect the modified code
> behavior.
> >
> > + or other transactions. Reading from a descriptor opened with
> > + <symbol>INV_WRITE</symbol> or <symbol>INV_READ</> <literal>|</>
> > + <symbol>INV_WRITE</symbol> returns data that reflects all writes of
> > + other committed transactions as well as writes of the current
> > + transaction.
>
> Indeed, you are right. There is an error here. This should read as
> "INV_READ | INV_WRITE" only. Using "INV_WRITE" implies that reads
> cannot happen.
>
>
Thanks for correcting.

I moved the cf entry to "ready for committer", and though my vote is
for keeping
the existing API behavior with write implying read, I let the committer
decide whether the following behavior change is Ok or not.
"Reading from a large-object descriptor opened with INV_WRITE is NOT
possible"

Thanks & Regards,
Vaishnavi
Fujitsu Australia.