| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Roman Eskin <r(dot)eskin(at)arenadata(dot)io>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Avoid orphaned objects dependencies, take 3 |
| Date: | 2026-06-19 02:13:38 |
| Message-ID: | b178a9b776897045b8cfe2745bb4f0b178a4ee55.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2026-06-18 at 16:21 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> IIUC, we cannot have false positives (tracking ACL checks that
> wouldn't
> have caused an abort) nor can we have false negatives (missing an ACL
> check that could cause an abort).
Idea: what if we check for changes in ACLs on the object, rather than
whether it passes the check or not?
Then, if track an ACL check that wouldn't actually cause a failure,
then it still might be acceptable to throw an error if the ACL changes.
Still some details to sort out, so this is just an idea.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2026-06-19 02:21:15 | Re: Performance Degradation (Table becomes bloat) During Repeated Bulk UPDATE Operations |
| Previous Message | torikoshia | 2026-06-19 01:59:56 | Re: Why is the LSN reported for pg_logical_emit_message() different from other decoded operations? |