Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Include foreign tables in information_schema.table_privileges

Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>

To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

Cc: "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>

Date: 2017-08-17T00:22:27Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

Correct representation of foreign tables in information schema
- 9b5140fb503e 11.0 cited
Include foreign tables in information_schema.table_privileges
- 9f0f4efc2f1e 9.3.19 cited
Basic foreign table support.
- 0d692a0dc9f0 9.1.0 cited

On 8/16/17 07:27, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 7:41 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
>> Include foreign tables in information_schema.table_privileges
>>
>> This appears to have been an omission in the original commit
>> 0d692a0dc9f.  All related information_schema views already include
>> foreign tables.
>>
>> Reported-by: Nicolas Thauvin <nicolas.thauvin@dalibo.com>
> 
> I would have been disinclined to back-patch this.  Somebody could be
> depending on the current behavior, and now we'll end up with two kinds
> of clusters, one where initdb was done before these changes and
> another where it was done afterward.  So nobody will be able to count
> on this behavior one way or the other.

I understand that.  But this is an additive change, so to speak, so
whatever behavior someone was relying on should continue to work.

I did not backpatch 9b5140fb503eb50634cd7e080d41f4d9af41e0a6 because
that is a behavior-breaking change.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services