| From: | Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] refactor ATExec{En,Dis}ableRowSecurity |
| Date: | 2021-02-28 22:27:44 |
| Message-ID: | CALNJ-vQS=fMYjp1ncwPfjZgdhmbyzaD+gaEQGxmb0rLGFH-6vA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
For 0002-Further-refactoring.patch, should there be assertion
inside ATExecSetRowSecurity() on the values for rls and force_rls ?
There could be 3 possible values: -1, 0 and 1.
Cheers
On Sun, Feb 28, 2021 at 1:19 PM Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote:
> tablecmds.c is 17k lines long, this makes it ~30 lines shorter.
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2021-02-28 22:30:24 | Re: Remove latch.c workaround for Linux < 2.6.27 |
| Previous Message | Justin Pryzby | 2021-02-28 22:25:30 | alter table set TABLE ACCESS METHOD |