Re: table partitioning and access privileges
От | Fujii Masao |
---|---|
Тема | Re: table partitioning and access privileges |
Дата | |
Msg-id | fa6318d0-b28b-145b-dd79-926a8a12caa4@oss.nttdata.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: table partitioning and access privileges (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: table partitioning and access privileges
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020/01/31 1:28, Fujii Masao wrote: > > > On 2020/01/31 1:02, Tom Lane wrote: >> Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> writes: >>> Thanks for updating the patch! Barring any objection, >>> I will commit this fix and backport it to all supported versions. >> >> Sorry for not having paid closer attention to this thread, but ... >> is back-patching this behavioral change really a good idea? >> >> It's not that hard to imagine that somebody is expecting the old >> behavior and will complain that we broke their application's security. >> So I'd have thought it better to fix only in HEAD, with a >> compatibility warning in the v13 release notes. >> >> I'm afraid it's much more likely that people will complain about >> making such a change in a minor release than that they will be >> happy about it. It's particularly risky to be making it in what >> will be the last 9.4.x release, because we will not have any >> opportunity to undo it in that branch if there is pushback. > > Fair enough. I finally did back-patch because the behavior is clearly > documented and I failed to hear the opinions to object the back-patch. > But I should have heard and discussed such risks more. > > I'm OK to revert all those back-patch. Instead, probably the document > should be updated in old branches. I'm thinking to wait at least half a day before reverting the back-patch just in case someone can give opinion during that period. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NTT DATA CORPORATION Advanced Platform Technology Group Research and Development Headquarters
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: