Re: Re: Segmentation fault in pg_dumpall from master down to 9.1 and other bug introduced by RLS
От | Stephen Frost |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: Segmentation fault in pg_dumpall from master down to 9.1 and other bug introduced by RLS |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20141114164749.GG28859@tamriel.snowman.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: Segmentation fault in pg_dumpall from master down to 9.1 and other bug introduced by RLS (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: Segmentation fault in pg_dumpall from master down
to 9.1 and other bug introduced by RLS
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
* Noah Misch (noah@leadboat.com) wrote: > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 11:24:20AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes: > > > * Noah Misch (noah@leadboat.com) wrote: > > >> I'd agree for a new design, but I see too little to gain from changing it now. > > >> Today's behavior is fine. > > > > > To clarify- you mean with the changes described- using usesuper for > > > rolreplication and rolbypassrls instead of 'false' when dumping from > > > older versions, correct? > > > > I think Noah is arguing for leaving the pg_dumpall queries as they > > stand. I disagree, but he's entitled to his opinion. > > Yes, that. Ah, ok. I'm impartial, but I do note that we're currently inconsistent and so I'd prefer to go one way or the other. rolcreaterole uses usesuper, while rolreplication and rolbypassrls do not. Noah- would you argue that we should change rolcreaterole, which has this behavior in all released branches (though, of course, it's only relevant when upgrading from a pre-8.1 server where we didn't have rolcreaterole)? What are your thoughts on the additional role attributes which are being discussed? > (Adopt Gilles Darold's fix, of course.) That's been done already. Thanks! Stephen
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: