| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nitin Motiani <nitinmotiani(at)google(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Support reading large objects with pg_read_all_data |
| Date: | 2026-02-23 17:07:21 |
| Message-ID: | aZyJSW9pZ3c3i0FG@nathan |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 13, 2026 at 11:17:28AM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> This looks pretty good to me. I'd like to let it sit on the lists a little
> while longer in case anyone else has feedback or objections. Assuming
> those don't materialize in the next week or so, I will proceed with
> committing it.
Here's what I have staged for commit. I didn't understand the reasoning
behind not giving pg_write_all_data privileges on large objects. Your
commit message mentions that "granting write access would imply write
permissions on a system catalog" (which I assume is referring to
pg_largeobject), but if granting UPDATE on a large object is sufficient to
allow updating portions of that catalog, then I see no reason to be so
strict with pg_write_all_data. It still doesn't allow updating the catalog
directly.
--
nathan
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v5-0001-Allow-pg_-read-write-_all_data-to-access-large-ob.patch | text/plain | 7.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2026-02-23 17:23:03 | Re: add warning upon successful md5 password auth |
| Previous Message | Jacob Champion | 2026-02-23 16:48:02 | Re: Add ssl_(supported|shared)_groups to sslinfo |