Horton

Thread

Commits

  1. Simplify code to switch pg_class.relrowsecurity in tablecmds.c

  1. [PATCH] refactor ATExec{En,Dis}ableRowSecurity

    Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> — 2021-02-28T21:18:54Z

    tablecmds.c is 17k lines long, this makes it ~30 lines shorter.

  2. Re: [PATCH] refactor ATExec{En,Dis}ableRowSecurity

    Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com> — 2021-02-28T22:27:44Z

    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@telsasoft.com> wrote:

> tablecmds.c is 17k lines long, this makes it ~30 lines shorter.
>

  3. Re: [PATCH] refactor ATExec{En,Dis}ableRowSecurity

    Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2021-03-01T06:30:44Z

    On Sun, Feb 28, 2021 at 02:27:44PM -0800, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> 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.

0001 is a clean simplification and a good catch, so I'll see about
applying it.  0002 just makes the code more confusing to the reader
IMO, and its interface could easily lead to unwanted errors.
--
Michael

  4. Re: [PATCH] refactor ATExec{En,Dis}ableRowSecurity

    Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2021-03-02T03:34:17Z

    On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 03:30:44PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> 0001 is a clean simplification and a good catch, so I'll see about
> applying it.  0002 just makes the code more confusing to the reader
> IMO, and its interface could easily lead to unwanted errors.

0001 has been applied as of fabde52.
--
Michael