On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 09:54:24AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 02:21:49PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> No objections here. I'll give this a few days for others to comment. I'm
>> not particularly interested in back-patching this since it's arguably not
>> fixing
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 02:21:49PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> No objections here. I'll give this a few days for others to comment. I'm
> not particularly interested in back-patching this since it's arguably not
> fixing anything that's incorrect, but if anyone really wants me to, I will.
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 01:38:37PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 1:03 PM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
>> While it's fresh on my mind, I very hastily hacked together a draft of what
>> I believe is the remaining work.
>
> That looks fine to me. And if others agree, I think it's
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 1:03 PM Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 11:48:30AM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 11:36:52AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> I suggest that we close the existing CF entry as committed and
> >> somebody can start a new one for
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 11:48:30AM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 11:36:52AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I suggest that we close the existing CF entry as committed and
>> somebody can start a new one for whatever remains. I think that will
>> be less confusing.
>
> Done:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 11:36:52AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I suggest that we close the existing CF entry as committed and
> somebody can start a new one for whatever remains. I think that will
> be less confusing.
Done: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/48/4923/.
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:03 AM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:33:15AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 09:21:39AM +0300, Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
> >> Can I ask you please to help me with determining status of CF item
> >> [0]. Is it committed or
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:33:15AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 09:21:39AM +0300, Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
>> Can I ask you please to help me with determining status of CF item
>> [0]. Is it committed or there's something to move to next CF?
>
> Only half of the patch
On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 09:21:39AM +0300, Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
> Can I ask you please to help me with determining status of CF item
> [0]. Is it committed or there's something to move to next CF?
Only half of the patch has been applied as of 3330a8d1b792. Yurii and
Nathan, could you follow
> On 24 Mar 2024, at 23:34, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> Committed that part.
Hi Nathan and Yurii!
Can I ask you please to help me with determining status of CF item [0]. Is it
committed or there's something to move to next CF?
Thanks!
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
[0]
On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 08:37:20AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 4:51 PM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
>> Actually, shouldn't this one be back-patched to v16? If so, I'd do that
>> one separately from the other changes we are discussing.
>
> Sure, that seems fine.
Committed
On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 4:51 PM Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Actually, shouldn't this one be back-patched to v16? If so, I'd do that
> one separately from the other changes we are discussing.
Sure, that seems fine.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 03:45:06PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 03:58:59PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 12:41 PM Nathan Bossart
>> wrote:
>>> I still think we should update the existing note about privileges for
>>> SET/RESET ROLE to something
On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 03:58:59PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 12:41 PM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
>> Looking again, I'm kind of hesitant to add too much qualification to this
>> note about losing superuser privileges.
>
> The note in question is:
>
>
>Note that when
On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 12:41 PM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 08:33:25AM -0700, Yurii Rashkovskii wrote:
> > This is a good start, indeed. I've amended my patch to include it.
>
> Thanks for the new patch.
>
> Looking again, I'm kind of hesitant to add too much qualification to
On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 11:11 PM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 08:33:25AM -0700, Yurii Rashkovskii wrote:
> > This is a good start, indeed. I've amended my patch to include it.
>
> Thanks for the new patch.
>
> Looking again, I'm kind of hesitant to add too much qualification
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 08:33:25AM -0700, Yurii Rashkovskii wrote:
> This is a good start, indeed. I've amended my patch to include it.
Thanks for the new patch.
Looking again, I'm kind of hesitant to add too much qualification to this
note about losing superuser privileges. If we changed it to
On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 3:09 PM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 02:36:16PM -0700, Yurii Rashkovskii wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 1:47 PM Nathan Bossart >
> > wrote:
> >> I think another issue is that the aforementioned note doesn't mention
> the
> >> new SET option added
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 02:36:16PM -0700, Yurii Rashkovskii wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 1:47 PM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
>> I think another issue is that the aforementioned note doesn't mention the
>> new SET option added in 3d14e17.
>
> How do you think we should word it in that note to
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 1:47 PM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 11:26:16AM -0700, Yurii Rashkovskii wrote:
> > I believe SET ROLE documentation makes a slightly incomplete statement
> > about what happens when a superuser uses SET ROLE.
> >
> > The documentation reading suggests
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 11:26:16AM -0700, Yurii Rashkovskii wrote:
> I believe SET ROLE documentation makes a slightly incomplete statement
> about what happens when a superuser uses SET ROLE.
>
> The documentation reading suggests that the superuser would lose all their
> privileges. However,
21 matches
Mail list logo
