Message-ID: <b178a9b776897045b8cfe2745bb4f0b178a4ee55.camel@j-davis.com>
Subject: Re: Avoid orphaned objects dependencies, take 3
From: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, Robert Haas
 <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,  Roman Eskin <r.eskin@arenadata.io>, Michael
 Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>,
 pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2026 19:13:38 -0700
In-Reply-To: <5591d661ea8189f5c057f6b48095f742e0d772f9.camel@j-davis.com>
References: <02e28438bd448ff4ee8f6fd78e6b74e657172d73.camel@j-davis.com>
	 <aiLKkTC6QBt8i35P@bdtpg>
	 <71eb9a8835a28165939da567a9d649fe6d21bfa7.camel@j-davis.com>
	 <aie26jMSoEMrHLaI@bdtpg>
	 <0fc145b9b5cf3f59207cf4ca60270448a2891c46.camel@j-davis.com>
	 <ailZCCmS0bGlNBfe@bdtpg> <ail/6I6mcitovsUo@bdtpg>
	 <a9eba27eeceebe751490951f0cf631906d4ffd75.camel@j-davis.com>
	 <ajEg7PrJYWnmB6zk@bdtpg>
	 <ac52a6aa6be9ccf5cf43c44d009b6e2aa7e2c93d.camel@j-davis.com>
	 <ajI0Tz9dIJvLGHNY@bdtpg>
	 <5591d661ea8189f5c057f6b48095f742e0d772f9.camel@j-davis.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.52.3-0ubuntu1.1 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/b178a9b776897045b8cfe2745bb4f0b178a4ee55.camel%40j-davis.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 2026-06-18 at 16:21 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> IIUC, we cannot have false positives (tracking ACL checks that
> wouldn't
> have caused an abort) nor can we have false negatives (missing an ACL
> check that could cause an abort).

Idea: what if we check for changes in ACLs on the object, rather than
whether it passes the check or not?

Then, if track an ACL check that wouldn't actually cause a failure,
then it still might be acceptable to throw an error if the ACL changes.
Still some details to sort out, so this is just an idea.

Regards,
	Jeff Davis