On 2022-11-23 We 18:54, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 02:56:28PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> I have committed the first couple of these to get them out of the way.
> Thanks!
>
>> But I think we need a bit of cleanup in the next patch.
>> vacuum_is_relation_owner() looks like it's now rather misnamed. Maybe
>> vacuum_is_permitted_for_relation()? Also I think we need a more thorough
>> reworking of the comments around line 566. And I think we need a more
>> detailed explanation of why the change in vacuum_rel is ok, and if it is
>> OK we should adjust the head comment on the function.
>>
>> In any case I think this comment would be better English with "might"
>> instead of "may":
>>
>> /* user may have the ANALYZE privilege */
> I've attempted to address all your feedback in v13. Please let me know if
> anything needs further reworking.
Thanks,
pushed.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
