On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 4:49 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2015-10-01 16:26:07 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> FWIW, I think that this technically wasn't a bug
>
> Meh. In which scenario would do a policy applied to EXCLUDED actually
> anything reasonable?
I agree that it's very unlikely to matter. Consistency is something
that is generally valued, though.
I'm not going to object if you want to continue with committing
something that changes excluded + RLS. I was just explaining my view
of the matter.
--
Peter Geoghegan
