Thread: Remove old RULE privilege completely
Hi, In v8.2, the RULE privilege for tables was removed, but for backward compatibility, GRANT/REVOKE RULE, has_table_privilege(..., 'RULE') etc are still accepted, though they don't perform any actions. Do we still need to maintain this backward compatibility? Could we consider removing the RULE privilege entirely? Regards, -- Fujii Masao Advanced Computing Technology Center Research and Development Headquarters NTT DATA CORPORATION
On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 10:37 AM Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote: > In v8.2, the RULE privilege for tables was removed, but for backward compatibility, > GRANT/REVOKE RULE, has_table_privilege(..., 'RULE') etc are still accepted, > though they don't perform any actions. > > Do we still need to maintain this backward compatibility? > Could we consider removing the RULE privilege entirely? 8.2 is a long time ago. If it's really been dead since then, I think we should remove it. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 02:45:37AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > On 2024/09/10 1:02, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 10:37 AM Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote: >> > In v8.2, the RULE privilege for tables was removed, but for backward compatibility, >> > GRANT/REVOKE RULE, has_table_privilege(..., 'RULE') etc are still accepted, >> > though they don't perform any actions. >> > >> > Do we still need to maintain this backward compatibility? >> > Could we consider removing the RULE privilege entirely? >> >> 8.2 is a long time ago. If it's really been dead since then, I think >> we should remove it. +1. It seems more likely to cause confusion at this point. > Ok, so, patch attached. > > There was a test to check if has_table_privilege() accepted the keyword RULE. > The patch removed it since it's now unnecessary and would only waste cycles > testing that has_table_privilege() no longer accepts the keyword. LGTM -- nathan
On 2024/09/10 4:49, Nathan Bossart wrote: >> Ok, so, patch attached. >> >> There was a test to check if has_table_privilege() accepted the keyword RULE. >> The patch removed it since it's now unnecessary and would only waste cycles >> testing that has_table_privilege() no longer accepts the keyword. > > LGTM Thanks for the review! Barring any objections, I'll commit the patch. Regards, -- Fujii Masao Advanced Computing Technology Center Research and Development Headquarters NTT DATA CORPORATION