Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> writes:
>> I agree with your analysis on this bug. For non-default
>> (defaclnamespace != 0) entries, their acl should be compared to NULL.
>>
>> The fix also looks good to me. But I think it'd be better to add tests for
>> this.
> Since the patch conflicts with the current HEAD, I've rebased and
> slightly updated the patch, adding the regression tests.
Hmmm ... if we're adding a comment about the defaclnamespace check,
seems like it would also be a nice idea to explain the S-to-s
transformation, because the reason for that is surely not apparent.
regards, tom lane
