Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1maySp-00014T-SA for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 10:59:55 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1maySo-0002Db-OP for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 10:59:54 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1maquT-0004LO-Ee; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 02:55:57 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1maquR-0006tp-9k; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 02:55:56 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 19E2tpSj721943; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 22:55:52 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Masahiko Sawada cc: Neil Chen , "Boris P. Korzun" , "pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org" , PostgreSQL-development Subject: Re: Inconsistent behavior of pg_dump/pg_restore on DEFAULT PRIVILEGES In-reply-to: References: <8261632200581@mail.yandex.ru> Comments: In-reply-to Masahiko Sawada message dated "Thu, 14 Oct 2021 09:36:55 +0900" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <721941.1634180151.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 22:55:51 -0400 Message-ID: <721942.1634180151@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Masahiko Sawada writes: >> I agree with your analysis on this bug. For non-default >> (defaclnamespace !=3D 0) entries, their acl should be compared to NULL. >> = >> The fix also looks good to me. But I think it'd be better to add tests = for this. > Since the patch conflicts with the current HEAD, I've rebased and > slightly updated the patch, adding the regression tests. Hmmm ... if we're adding a comment about the defaclnamespace check, seems like it would also be a nice idea to explain the S-to-s transformation, because the reason for that is surely not apparent. regards, tom lane