On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 01:35:39PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Thanks for the quick review. I'll plan on committing this shortly if CI is
> happy.
Committed.
--
nathan
On 2025-Mar-12, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 05:23:25PM +0100, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Strange: this code is not covered by any tests.
> >
> > https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/utils/adt/acl.c.gcov.html#5533
> > https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/utils/adt/
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 07:34:16PM +0100, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> Thanks :-) I confirm that this covers the code in select_best_grantor
> that you're modifying.
Thanks for the quick review. I'll plan on committing this shortly if CI is
happy.
--
nathan
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 05:23:25PM +0100, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> Strange: this code is not covered by any tests.
>
> https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/utils/adt/acl.c.gcov.html#5533
> https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/utils/adt/acl.c.gcov.html#5438
Huh. Well, it's easy enoug
On 2025-Mar-12, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> There's a count_one_bits() function in acl.c that can be replaced with a
> call to pg_popcount64(). This isn't performance-critical code, but IMHO we
> might as well use the centralized implementation.
Makes sense. Patch looks good to me.
> @@ -5532,7 +5
