| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Andreas Lind <andreaslindpetersen(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: equalPolicy() doesn't compare the permissive flag |
| Date: | 2026-07-13 02:06:19 |
| Message-ID: | alRIG8yBBUCUAtUq@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 08:58:22AM +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> I don't know if the omission to check for identical PERMISSIVE or
> RESTRICTIVE settings can lead to real problems, but I feel that it
> violates the promise of the function. So I am +1 on this change.
That does not make sense here, two policies with a different
polpermissive are not the same, or am I missing something?
That just looks like a hole coming from 093129c9d9fc where the field
has been added. Here is the thread related to this commit, without
the relcache part being mentioned:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160901063404.GY4028%40tamriel.snowman.net
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | jian he | 2026-07-13 02:14:18 | Re: [PATCH] no table rewrite when set column type to constrained domain |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2026-07-13 01:09:39 | Re: [PATCH v1 0/7] Wait event timing and tracing instrumentation |