From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: Yugo NAGATA <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
Cc: Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: RLS makes COPY TO process child tables
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 11:34:02 -0500
Message-ID: <825494.1678466042@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y+L0jZJkHvgdOZRA@tamriel.snowman.net>
References: <3472.1675251957@antos>
<20230202011525.c7c05900bcf791f868d72a51@sraoss.co.jp>
<1379089.1675270043@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20230202160031.defd38f35433c7677b48a8ec@sraoss.co.jp>
<Y+L0jZJkHvgdOZRA@tamriel.snowman.net>
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
>> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> Yugo NAGATA <nagata@sraoss.co.jp> writes:
>>>> I think this is a bug because the current behaviour is different from
>>>> the documentation.
>>> I agree, it shouldn't do that.
> Yeah, I agree based on what the COPY table TO docs say should be
> happening.
Yeah, the documentation is quite clear that child data is not included.
> I'm not sure if this makes good sense to back-patch.
I think we have to. The alternative is to back-patch some very confusing
documentation changes saying "never mind all that if RLS is on".
regards, tom lane
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, sfrost@snowman.net, nagata@sraoss.co.jp, ah@cybertec.at
Subject: Re: RLS makes COPY TO process child tables
In-Reply-To: <825494.1678466042@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