Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460)
От | KaiGai Kohei |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4B2B40FA.1010902@ak.jp.nec.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460) (Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
(2009/12/18 15:48), Takahiro Itagaki wrote: > > Robert Haas<robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > >> In both cases, I'm lost. Help? > > They might be contrasted with the comments for myLargeObjectExists. > Since we use MVCC visibility in loread(), metadata for large object > also should be visible in MVCC rule. > > If I understand them, they say: > * pg_largeobject_aclmask_snapshot requires a snapshot which will be > used in loread(). > * Don't use LargeObjectExists if you need MVCC visibility. Yes, correct. >> In acldefault(), there is this comment: >> /* Grant SELECT,UPDATE by default, for now */ >> This doesn't seem to match what the code is doing, so I think we >> should remove it. > > Ah, ACL_NO_RIGHTS is the default. Oops, it reflects very early phase design, but fixed later. >> I also notice that dumpBlobComments() is now misnamed, but it seems >> we've chosen to add a comment mentioning that fact rather than fixing it. > > Hmmm, now it dumps not only comments but also ownership of large objects. > Should we rename it dumpBlobMetadata() or so? It seems to me quite natural. The attached patch fixes them. Thanks, -- OSS Platform Development Division, NEC KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com>
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: