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 fab
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'l
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 wrote:
> tablecmds.c is 17k lines long, this makes it ~30 lin
tablecmds.c is 17k lines long, this makes it ~30 lines shorter.
>From 2e9500227d45142eb00e9e1ebee001642a834518 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Justin Pryzby
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2021 20:39:10 -0600
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Refactor ATExec{En,Dis}ableRowSecurity in the style of
ATExecForceNoForceRowSecuri
