On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 01:34:00PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Note that the development of PostgreSQL 16 has just finished, so now
> may not be the best moment to add these extra AOT calls, but these
> could be added in 17~ for sure at the beginning of July once the next
> development cycle be
On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 04:16:10PM +0800, Legs Mansion wrote:
> actually, some location can be tricky to add.
> it looks like CREATE, but it’s actually ALTER, should call
> InvokeObjectPostAlterHook instead
> of InvokeObjectPostCreateHook? eg.,CREATE OR REPLACE, CREATE
> TYPE(perfecting shell type
Hi Michael
thank you for your explanation.
actually, some location can be tricky to add.
it looks like CREATE, but it’s actually ALTER, should call
InvokeObjectPostAlterHook instead of InvokeObjectPostCreateHook?
eg.,CREATE OR REPLACE, CREATE TYPE(perfecting shell type)
Thank you
-
On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 09:51:30AM +0800, Legs Mansion wrote:
> Recently, I ran into a problem, InvokeObjectPostAlterHook was
> implemented for sepgsql, sepgsql use it to determine whether to
> check permissions during certain operations. But
> InvokeObjectPostAlterHook doesn't handle all of the
Recently, I ran into a problem, InvokeObjectPostAlterHook was implemented for
sepgsql,
sepgsql use it to determine whether to check permissions during certain
operations.
But InvokeObjectPostAlterHook doesn't handle all of the alter's behavior, at
least the table is not controlled. e.g., ALTER T
