On 3/30/21 3:37 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 3/21/21 12:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think we may have to adjust the acl.c APIs, or maybe better provide new
>> entry points, so that we can have variants of pg_xxx_aclcheck that won't
>> throw a hard error upon not finding the row. We cheesily tried to avoid
>> adjusting those APIs to support the semantics we need here, and we now see
>> that it didn't really work.
>
> Ok, I took a shot at that; see attached.
Heh, I missed the forest for the trees it seems.
That version undid the changes fixing what Ian was originally complaining about.
New version attached that preserves the fixed behavior.
> Questions:
> 1. I confined the changes to just pg_class_aclcheck/mask
> and pg_attribute_aclcheck/mask -- did you intend
> that we do this same change across the board? Or
> perhaps do the rest of them once we open up pg15
> development?
>
> 2. This seems more invasive than something we would want
> to back patch -- agreed?
The questions remain...
Joe
--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development
