Re: pgsql: Remove some dead code in selfuncs.c
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgsql: Remove some dead code in selfuncs.c |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4177931.1674149844@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgsql: Remove some dead code in selfuncs.c (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>) |
Список | pgsql-committers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes: > On 2023-Jan-19, Tom Lane wrote: >> Ah, sorry, -ENOCAFFEINE. It's talking about the access-as-user field, >> not the relation's owner. I agree that as querytrees are currently >> built, this is probably a safe optimization. But do we really want >> to hard-wire such a subtle assumption to gain a microscopic speed >> benefit? It's not as though GetUserId() is expensive. > Well, I didn't see it as an optimization but rather a removal of > confusing code. Given the current RTEPermissionInfo representation, > it's just not possible for an "otherrel" to have a different > access-as-user value than what "the relation mentioned in the query" > has -- by construction, they share the same RTEPermissionInfo. > If we wanted to decouple selfuncs.c from that knowledge, then what we > should be doing is obtain the RTEPermissionInfo for the relation, and > use the userid from there. But the code I deleted wasn't doing that, it > was just using the same 'onerel' all the time. It's not difficult (or > expensive) to do otherwise, but it seems somewhat pointless. Hmm. Point taken, and I agree that it's not worth adding complication that wasn't there before to track this. No further objection. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-committers по дате отправления: