pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: table partitioning and access privileges
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 16:59:46 +0900
Message-ID: <6cb06600-94b4-e68d-f835-934fe4eb3fac@oss.nttdata.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+HiwqH7fWirNP=c776Rg4d5ivD2DMoEu-oQkLk8eaAKiqtk7w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHGQGwFHdSvifhJE+-GSNqUHSfbiKxaeQQ7HGcYz6SC2n_oDcg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+HiwqGCQLKizA+Voyw3GjRv0q8t9adS2YFGmw6GzAbRb+yazg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHGQGwE+GauyG7POtRfRwwthAGwTjPQYdFHR97+LzA4RHGnJxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+HiwqF55uZK6znXq7=qP-LS5HQkcjGEvCHxGUjYhJGq=z9nDg@mail.gmail.com>
	<3546b691-b744-12c9-fd2f-7dc31c3c030e@oss.nttdata.com>
	<21015.1580400165@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<d686c99b-6567-9c6c-4f41-129a106afdb5@oss.nttdata.com>
	<CA+HiwqHfTnMU6SUkyHxCmpHUKk7ERLHCR3vZVq19ZOQBjPBLmQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<f3dba4e6-ddeb-5126-b9a6-13a04c7c23dc@oss.nttdata.com>
	<CA+HiwqHpNqL9uL13pjrC6Ou2T-WnhoGftb6WXBPkK9nprex3Eg@mail.gmail.com>
	<79ee190f-8219-6091-d2e5-ffae1bcf8d6e@oss.nttdata.com>
	<CA+HiwqFbwt4=KQy3S4OOqi=Pi4QywNXxfqesAkAObxjUD9okVQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<ccfaf1b3-f7ab-1d56-6363-00ce1276bca5@oss.nttdata.com>
	<CA+HiwqEkiApF9ieeHJigYTohmjmjLR5SB6-i3FbOQnLSUy8Ezg@mail.gmail.com>
	<0e521cac-e00b-bf0f-4a11-5f7c2366a7f5@oss.nttdata.com>
	<CA+HiwqH7fWirNP=c776Rg4d5ivD2DMoEu-oQkLk8eaAKiqtk7w@mail.gmail.com>



On 2020/02/14 10:28, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 8:39 PM Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote:
>> On 2020/02/07 10:39, Amit Langote wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 1:16 AM Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote:
>>>> Yes, so I will review your patch getting rid of
>>>> LOCK TABLE exception.
>>>
>>> Attached updated patch.
>>
>> Thanks! This patch basically looks good to me except
>> the following minor comment.
>>
>>    ROLLBACK;
>> -BEGIN;
>> -LOCK TABLE ONLY lock_tbl1;
>> -ROLLBACK;
>>    RESET ROLE;
>>
>> I think that there is no strong reason why these SQLs need to be
>> removed. We can verify that even "LOCK TABLE ONLY" command works
>> expectedly on the inherited tables by keeping those SQLs in the
>> regression test. So what about not removing these SQLs?
> 
> Hmm, that test becomes meaningless with the behavior change we are
> introducing, but I am okay with not removing it.

Only this regression test seems to verify LOCK TABLE ONLY command.
So if we remove this, I'm afraid that the test coverage would be reduced.

> However, I added a test showing that locking child table directly doesn't work.
> 
> Attached updated patch.

Thanks for updating the patch!
Barring any objection, I will commit the patch.

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao
NTT DATA CORPORATION
Advanced Platform Technology Group
Research and Development Headquarters





view thread (25+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <6cb06600-94b4-e68d-f835-934fe4eb3fac@oss.nttdata.com>
Permalink:  ../6cb06600-94b4-e68d-f835-934fe4eb3fac@oss.nttdata.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/6cb06600-94b4-e68d-f835-934fe4eb3fac@oss.nttdata.com

 · 

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: masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com, amitlangote09@gmail.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, masao.fujii@gmail.com
  Subject: Re: table partitioning and access privileges
  In-Reply-To: <6cb06600-94b4-e68d-f835-934fe4eb3fac@oss.nttdata.com>

* 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