Re: table partitioning and access privileges

On 2020/01/31 1:28, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
> On 2020/01/31 1:02, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> writes:
>>> Thanks for updating the patch! Barring any objection,
>>> I will commit this fix and backport it to all supported versions.
>>
>> Sorry for not having paid closer attention to this thread, but ...
>> is back-patching this behavioral change really a good idea?
>>
>> It's not that hard to imagine that somebody is expecting the old
>> behavior and will complain that we broke their application's security.
>> So I'd have thought it better to fix only in HEAD, with a
>> compatibility warning in the v13 release notes.
>>
>> I'm afraid it's much more likely that people will complain about
>> making such a change in a minor release than that they will be
>> happy about it.  It's particularly risky to be making it in what
>> will be the last 9.4.x release, because we will not have any
>> opportunity to undo it in that branch if there is pushback.
>
> Fair enough. I finally did back-patch because the behavior is clearly
> documented and I failed to hear the opinions to object the back-patch.
> But I should have heard and discussed such risks more.
>
> I'm OK to revert all those back-patch. Instead, probably the document
> should be updated in old branches.

I'm thinking to wait at least half a day before reverting
the back-patch just in case someone can give opinion
during that period.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao
NTT DATA CORPORATION
Advanced Platform Technology Group
Research and Development Headquarters