Re: Fix RLS checks for UPDATE/DELETE FOR PORTION OF leftover rows

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
To: Paul A Jungwirth <pj(at)illuminatedcomputing(dot)com>, Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ayush Tiwari <ayushtiwari(dot)slg01(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Fix RLS checks for UPDATE/DELETE FOR PORTION OF leftover rows
Date: 2026-07-20 06:53:20
Message-ID: a1e965bc-01c0-47cd-8588-4cb3e60a1184@eisentraut.org
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 16.07.26 17:35, Paul A Jungwirth wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 6:10 PM Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> Actually, when I received v4, I was also working on addressing Dean’s comments.
>>
>> I reviewed both v4 and v5, made some small adjustments, and here is v6:
>>
>> * For the create_policy doc change, I changed “check new row” to “check leftover rows”.
>> * For the “SELECT rights” comment, I moved it into the block comment, because its position in v5 looked like a placeholder.
>> * For the tests, v4 and v5 added the new cases in the MERGE section. I added the test in a more direct section.
>> * For the tests, v4 and v5 granted INSERT privilege. V6 intentionally does not, because the test runs UPDATE/DELETE FOR PORTION OF, and INSERT privilege is not required for inserting leftover rows by design.
>
> I took a look. These all seem like improvements to me.

committed v6

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2026-07-20 06:54:41 Re: Unexpected behavior after OOM errors
Previous Message Rafia Sabih 2026-07-20 06:52:17 Re: Allow table AMs to define their own reloptions