pg.ddx.io pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive help / color / mirror / Atom feed From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: TopoSort() fix
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2019 13:44:17 -0400
Message-ID: <27870.1564508657@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw )
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmobQwnEwcdigz_QDS+npXejx17OPOvnRSCHw1T9evVQY9g@mail.gmail.com >
References: <CAEri+mKtZkj=+phnkkD9_8sf1fLFUqwHio8Ls4f7JGVgqku6QQ@mail.gmail.com >
<20190726220538.GA17809@alvherre.pgsql >
<20190726234835.xqyfukqhhzdiqoih@alap3.anarazel.de >
<17997.1564187056@sss.pgh.pa.us >
<20190729015059.GE6959@paquier.xyz >
<23797.1564412165@sss.pgh.pa.us >
<CA+Tgmob7Hj9kDcULJUPv7mNw9KwXpVkwe9TXw_fxQrDWWbb_sA@mail.gmail.com >
<3243.1564437314@sss.pgh.pa.us >
<CA+TgmoaUQ+XvS+3U3GBsprSqUq1PBXk2RU_cbSopj2q+GFO=Lw@mail.gmail.com >
<13215.1564451308@sss.pgh.pa.us >
<CA+TgmobX+8Hj9Q-yREEqZGDjeMLAvKoSPt8jEs6Tc55VjVxgsg@mail.gmail.com >
<11847.1564496844@sss.pgh.pa.us >
<CA+TgmobUiYFpdX2=FErkT7gmu9FsL3_CgU35wfRb+WecVMLktw@mail.gmail.com >
<27546.1564508196@sss.pgh.pa.us >
<CA+TgmobQwnEwcdigz_QDS+npXejx17OPOvnRSCHw1T9evVQY9g@mail.gmail.com >
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 1:36 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> In any case, my question at the moment is whether we need the belt-and-
>> suspenders-too approach of having both non-parallel-safe marking and an
>> explicit check inside these functions. We've largely moved away from
>> hard-wired checks for e.g. superuserness, and surely these things are
>> less dangerous than most formerly-superuser-only functions.
> If we can't think of a way that the lack of these checks could crash
> it, then I think it's OK to remove the hardwired checks. If we can,
> I'd favor keeping them.
Well, there'd be an actual isolation test that they work ;-), if you
override the marking. Admittedly, one test case does not prove that
there's no way to crash the system, but that can be said of most
parts of Postgres.
regards, tom lane
view thread (27+ messages) latest in thread
Message-ID: <27870.1564508657@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink: ../27870.1564508657@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on: postgresql.org/message-id/27870.1564508657@sss.pgh.pa.us
copy link · copy postgr.es
reply Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, robertmhaas@gmail.com, michael@paquier.xyz, andres@anarazel.de, alvherre@2ndquadrant.com
Subject: Re: TopoSort() fix
In-Reply-To: <27870.1564508657@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox