From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: =?UTF-8?B?0JDQvdC00YDQtdC5INCg0LDRh9C40YbQutC40Lk=?=
 <therealgofman@mail.ru>
cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org,
        =?UTF-8?B?Um9iZXJ0IEhhYXM=?= <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: BUG #18545: \dt breaks transaction,
 calling error when executed in SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION
In-reply-to: <1722241488.182053205@f169.i.mail.ru>
References: <18545-feba138862f19aaa@postgresql.org>
 <72802.1721415837@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1722241488.182053205@f169.i.mail.ru>
Comments: In-reply-to =?UTF-8?B?0JDQvdC00YDQtdC5INCg0LDRh9C40YbQutC40Lk=?=
 <therealgofman@mail.ru>
	message dated "Mon, 29 Jul 2024 11:24:48 +0300"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-ID: <3593203.1722466756.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:59:16 -0400
Message-ID: <3593204.1722466756@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3593204.1722466756%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

=3D?UTF-8?B?0JDQvdC00YDQtdC5INCg0LDRh9C40YbQutC40Lk=3D?=3D <therealgofman@=
mail.ru> writes:
> Hi, Tom!=C2=A0Thank you for work on the subject.=C2=A0 After applying pa=
tch, problem is no longer reproducible.

Thanks for checking.  I realized that the idea of making
check_session_authorization a no-op was wrong as presented:
if we don't set up an "extra" struct then guc.c would be
unable to restore the setting later, in case say a function
that's run inside the parallel query has a SET
session_authorization clause.  It's probably possible to
revive that idea with more work, but it's not essential to the
bug fix and we're getting close to the August minor releases.
So I pushed the core bug fix, and I'll take another look at
that part later.

			regards, tom lane