Hi,
On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 5:02 PM Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
>
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2024 at 11:54, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > 1) Extends the CREATE EXTENSION command to support a new option, SET
> > SEARCH_PATH.
>
>
> I don't think it makes sense to add such an opti
Hi Alexander,
On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 6:26 PM Alexander Kukushkin wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2024 at 14:50, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>>
>> If the author has configured the search_path for any desired function,
>> using this option with the CREATE EXTENSION co
Hi Jeff,
On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 3:07 AM Jeff Davis wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2024-06-11 at 15:24 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > 3) When the ALTER EXTENSION SET SCHEMA command is executed and if the
> > function's search_path contains the old schema of the extension, it
>
On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 9:35 AM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> Hi Jeff,
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 3:07 AM Jeff Davis wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2024-06-11 at 15:24 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > > 3) When the ALTER EXTENSION SET SCHEMA command is executed and if
Also curious what happens if an extension author has search_path
> already set in proconfig for a function that doesn't match what's in
> the control file. I'm guessing the function one should take
> precedence.
>
Yes, if the author has explicitly set the proconfig
Hi,
Please find the attached patch addressing all the comments. I kindly
request your review and feedback. Your thoughts are greatly
appreciated.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
v3-0001-Introduce-a-new-control-file-flag-called-protected-f.patch
Description: Binary data
dalone
functions created independently. The difference is that installing
extensions typically requires superuser privileges, which is not the
case with standalone functions.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
dditionally, is it advisable to restrict truncation of the pg_class
table? It's like a kind of circular dependency in case of pg_class
which is not applicable in case of other catalog tables.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 7:50 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Robert Haas writes:
> > On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 8:10 AM Ashutosh Sharma
> > wrote:
> >> Executing below commands:
> >> -- set allow_system_table_mods TO on;
> >> -- truncate table pg_type;
Hi Robert, Andres, Tom,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 8:02 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2024-06-18 19:58:26 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 7:50 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > >
> > > Robert Haas
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 8:25 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Ashutosh Sharma writes:
> > On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 7:50 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I think the assertion you noticed is there because the code path gets
> >> traversed during REINDEX, which is an operatio
The main aim here is to enhance security for functions
created by extensions by setting search_path at the function level.
This ensures precise control over how objects are accessed within each
function, making behavior more predictable and minimizing security
risks, especially for SECURITY DEFINER functions associated with
extensions created by superusers.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
3 times. Won't that create a problem if
many concurrent sessions engage in similar activity?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
Hi Robert,
On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 5:50 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 7:49 AM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > If the dependency is more, this can hit max_locks_per_transaction
> > limit very fast.
>
> Your experiment doesn't support this conclusion. V
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 12:40 AM Jeff Davis wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2024-06-19 at 08:53 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > For standalone functions, users can easily adjust the search_path
> > settings as needed. However, managing this becomes challenging for
> > function
promotion".
>
> I have just noticed that we do not have a CF entry for this proposal,
> so I have added one with Laurenz as author:
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/44/4504/
>
> For now the patch is waiting on author. Could you address my
> last review?
Thanks for rev
his is one
possible approach.
Another solution could be to categorize extension-created functions to
avoid duplication. This might not be an ideal solution, but it's another
consideration worth sharing.
Thoughts?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 2:25 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 12:52 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> We all know that installing an extension typically requires superuser
>> privileges, which means the database objects i
e the one
representing the transaction begin message, not the LSN of the last decoded
data which is yet to be sent. Please let me know if I am missing something
here.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 6:23 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 4:14 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > The logically decoded data are sent to the logical subscriber at the time
> > of transaction commit, assuming that th
On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 5:36 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 8:32 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 6:23 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 4:14 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> > >
On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 5:24 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 1:43 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 5:36 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 8:32 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> > >
know your thoughts/comments. thank you.!
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 7:21 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 8:09 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 5:24 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 1:43 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> > &
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 5:13 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 8:19 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Currently, we have pg_current_wal_insert_lsn and pg_walfile_name sql
> > functions which gives us information about the
On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 7:41 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 9:53 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, we can either add this functionality to pg_waldump or maybe add
> > a new binary itself that would return this information.
>
> IMV,
On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 6:05 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 10:25 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
> >
> > PFA that enhances pg_waldump to show the latest LSN and the
> > corresponding WAL file when the -l or --lastLSN option is passed an
> >
PFA v2 patch.
Changes in the v2 patch:
- Reuse the existing get_controlfile function in
src/common/controldata_utils.c instead of adding a new one.
- Set env variable PGDATA with the data directory specified by the user.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 12:24 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> PFA v2 patch.
>
> Changes in the v2 patch:
>
> - Reuse the existing get_controlfile function in
> src/common/controldata_utils.c instead of adding a new one.
>
> - Set env variable PGDATA with the data dire
other scenarios it should just
throw an error (FATAL, ERROR ... depending on the type of failure that
occurred). Please let me know your thoughts on this change. thanks.!
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 9:55 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2023/06/07 2:00, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > On Tue, 2023-06-06 at 16:35 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >> At present, pg_promote() returns true to the caller on successful
> >> promotion of standby,
here?
>
I've added these changes to restrict users from explicitly setting the
$extension_schema in the search_path. This ensures that
$extension_schema can only be set implicitly for functions created by
the extension when the "protected" flag is enabled.
I apologize for not commenting on this change initially. I'll review
the patch, add comments where needed, and submit an updated version.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
Hi Robert.
On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 11:15 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 8:05 AM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > I've added these changes to restrict users from explicitly setting the
> > $extension_schema in the search_path. This ensures that
> > $ext
Hi Robert,
On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 9:40 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 1:55 AM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > Just to confirm, are you suggesting to remove the protected flag and
> > set the default search_path (as $extension_schema,) for all functions
>
just thought of sharing it just because
something of this sort would probably solve most of the issues related
to extensions.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
v4-0001-Introduce-new-control-file-parameter-protected-to-de.patch
Description: Binary data
you.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:01 AM vignesh C wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 12:44 AM Andres Freund wrote
> >
> >
> > Hm. you don't explicitly mention that in your design, but given how
>
,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 9:42 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 4:57 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I've spent little bit of time going through the project discussion th
er patches as of
now. I will do that whenever possible. Thank you.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:01 AM vignesh C wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 12:44 AM Andres Freund wrote
> >
> >
> > Hm. you don't
ine beaks* which
possibly means line breaks. This is applicable for other comments as well
where you
7) Is the following checking equivalent to IsWorker()? If so, it would be
good to replace it with an IsWorker like macro to increase the readability.
(IsParallelCopy() && !IsLeader())
--
With
1 as select from t2;
ERROR: view must have at least one column
OR,
postgres=# create view v1 as select * from t2;
ERROR: view must have at least one column
Isn't that a bug in create rule command or am i missing something here ?
If it is a bug, then, attached is the patch
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 12:48 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2019-02-08 12:18:32 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > When "ON SELECT" rule is created on a table without columns, it
> > successfully converts a table into the view. However, when the same is
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 3:05 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
>
>
> On February 8, 2019 10:05:03 AM GMT+01:00, Rushabh Lathia
> wrote:
> >On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 12:48 PM Andres Freund
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 2019-02-08 12:18:32 +
ease have a look and let me know your opinion.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
diff --git a/src/backend/commands/view.c b/src/backend/commands/view.c
index 65f4b40..c49ae97 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/view.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/view.c
@@ -11
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 11:32 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Ashutosh Sharma writes:
> > Attached is the patch that allows us to create view on a table without
> > columns. I've also added some test-cases for it in create_view.sql.
> > Please have a look and let me know your
On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 12:20 AM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 11:32 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Ashutosh Sharma writes:
> > > Attached is the patch that allows us to create view on a table without
> > > columns. I've also added
Thanks Andres for the quick review.
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 3:52 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2019-02-11 15:39:03 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > Andres, Tom, Please have a look into the attached patch and let me
> > know if I'm still missing somethin
On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 11:10 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Ashutosh Sharma writes:
> > [ allow-create-view-on-table-without-columns-v3.patch ]
>
> Pushed. I revised the test cases a bit --- notably, I wanted to be
> sure we exercised pg_dump's createDummyViewAsClause fo
call stored procedures with different type of
parameters.
Please have a look and let me know your thoughts.
Thank you.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
diff --git a/src/interfaces/ecpg/preproc/ecpg.addons b/src/interfaces/ecpg/preproc/ecpg.addons
index 4e
t in ecpg application would be like this:
EXEC SQL CALL(:hv1, :hv2) INTO :ret1, ret2;
EXEC SQL CALL(:hv1, :hv2) INTO :ret1 :ind1, :ret2, :ind2;
In case if INTO clause is not used with the CALL statement then the
ecpg compiler would fail with a parse error: "INTO clause is required
with CALL
n the pageinspect functions for btree and heap as well
for safety purpose. Thoughts?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
AINTS statements with deferrable constraints inside DO blocks.
Please let me know your opinion on this. Thanks.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 3:30 PM, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> On 02.07.18 11:46, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>> Currently, I could see only one test-case for deferred constraints in
>> plpgsql_transaction.sql file which tests if the constraint checking is
>> happening during commit
On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 7:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ashutosh Sharma writes:
>> On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 3:30 PM, Peter Eisentraut
>> wrote:
>>> I won't say we don't need more tests, but I don't see a particular
>>> testing gap in this area.
>
&g
opy
paste error which got transferred from bt_page_items (the function
that doesn't deal with raw page).
Attached is the patch with the correct error message.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
diff --git a/contrib/pageinspect/btreefuncs.c b/contrib/pageinsp
ng some
delay just before "-- now create an unused line pointer" and use the
delay to start a new session either with repeatable read or
serializable transaction isolation level and run some query on the
test table. To fix this, as you suggested I've converted the test
table to th
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 1:25 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Robert Haas writes:
> > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 6:26 AM Ashutosh Sharma
> > wrote:
> >> Thanks for reporting. I'm able to reproduce the issue by creating some
> >> delay just before "--
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 9:14 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Ashutosh Sharma writes:
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 1:25 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> * Should any of the other tables in the test be converted to temp?
>
> > Are you trying to say that we can achieve the things being
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:40 AM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 9:14 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Ashutosh Sharma writes:
> > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 1:25 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> * Should any of the other tables in the test be conv
e.
+ */
+#define WORKER_CHUNK_COUNT 50
You may see these kinds of errors at other places as well if you scan
through your patch.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 11:51 AM vignesh C wrote:
>
> Thanks Greg for reviewing the
e.
>
Looks good to me too.
Thanks,
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
ase let me know if I am missing something here. Thank you.
> BTW, attached is a quick-hack patch to allow automated testing
> of this scenario, along the lines I sketched yesterday. This
> test passes if you run the two scripts serially, but not when
> you run them in parallel. I'm not proposing this for commit;
> it's a hack and its timing behavior is probably not stable enough
> for the buildfarm. But it's pretty useful for poking at these
> issues.
>
Yeah, understood, thanks for sharing this.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
table (i.e. no data replication happens)
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
ly
support protocol %d or lower",
data->protocol_version, LOGICALREP_PROTO_VERSION_NUM)));
Other than this, I don't have any comments.
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 5:34 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 4:15 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Mon
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:58 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:27 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Dilip for the patch. AFAIU, the fix looks good. One small comment:
> >
>
> Thanks Ashutosh and Dilip for working on this. I'll look i
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:02 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 8:34 AM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:58 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:27 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> > > wrote:
>
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:22 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:02 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 8:34 AM Ashutosh Sharma
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:58 PM Amit Kapila
> > >
will start streaming changes for the in-progress
transactions even if the streaming was disabled while creating the
subscription, won't it?
Please let me know if I am missing something here.
Thanks,
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
F-8.
>
Thanks Bharath for the testing. The results look impressive.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 8:12 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:33 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > Hi Amit,
> >
> > > Here, I think instead of using MySubscription->stream, we should use
> > > server/walrecv version number as we use
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 3:01 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 2:44 PM vignesh C wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Ashutosh for your comments.
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 6:36 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Vignesh,
e in
copyparallel.c file. For reference, please see how a brief description
about parallel vacuum has been added in the vacuumlazy.c file.
* Lazy vacuum supports parallel execution with parallel worker processes. In
* a parallel vacuum, we perform both index vacuum and index cleanup with
On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 5:42 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> Hi Vignesh,
>
> Thanks for the updated patches. Here are some more comments that I can
> find after reviewing your latest patches:
>
> +/*
> + * This structure helps in storing the common data from CopyStateData th
Congrats everyone and special congratulations to Amit for becoming the
first Indian PostgreSQL committer !!
On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 9:40 AM, Nikolay Samokhvalov
wrote:
> сб, 2 июня 2018 г. в 1:10, Teodor Sigaev :
>
>>
>> > Etsuro Fujita
>> > Peter Geoghegan
>> > Amit Kapila
>> > Alexander Korotko
from Install.pm's lcopy function
Commit 3a7cc727c was a little over eager about adding an explicit return
to this function, whose value is checked in most call sites. This change
reverses that and returns the expected value explicitly. It also adds a
check to the one call site lacking one.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
>
>
> --
> With Regards,
> Amit Kapila.
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
ting to me. But, as Euler Taveira mentioned,
can't we extend an existing function pg_stat_statements_reset()
instead of adding a new one and update the documentation for it. Also,
in the test-case it would be good to display the output of
pg_stat_statements before and after deleting the query. Than
Hi,
It seems like in case of few system calls for e.g. write system call,
errno is not set even if the number of bytes written is smaller than
the bytes requested and for such cases we explicitly set an errno to
ENOSPC. Something like this,
/*
* if write didn't se
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 01:00:45PM +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>> It seems like in case of few system calls for e.g. write system call,
>> errno is not set even if the number of bytes written is smaller than
>> th
On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 7:36 AM, Haribabu Kommi
wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 5:45 AM Euler Taveira wrote:
>>
>> 2018-06-22 12:06 GMT-03:00 Robert Haas :
>> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 10:19 AM, Euler Taveira
>> > wrote:
>> >> 2018-06-20 4:30 GMT-03:00 Haribabu Kommi :
>> >>> Attached is a simp
On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 6:43 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 03:45:33PM +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>> Okay, thanks for the confirmation. Few of them are also there in
>> origin.c and snapbuild.c files.
>
> Thanks Ashutosh. I have been reviewing the w
to load this file. \quit
Note : Please ignore this mail if it has already been reported by someone.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
> > The test_session_hooks--1.0.sql file in the newly added
> 'test_session_hooks'
> > module suggests to load the extension named &
TRAP: BadState("!(((bool) ((CurrentUserId) != ((Oid) 0", File:
"miscinit.c", Line: 286)
2017-11-16 19:06:22.090 IST [65378] LOG: background worker "logical
replication launcher" (PID 65387) exited with exit code 1
2017-11-16 19:06:22.337 IST [6537
.
[1] -
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAE9k0P%3DtX_egPEX9NzPrroumXt5%3DbOQBiP98CaLzHOyXk7%2Bq7Q%40mail.gmail.com
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/30479.1510800078%40sss.pgh.pa.us#30479.1510800...@sss
,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/information_schema.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/information_schema.sgml
index 09ef282..6d1a38e 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/information_schema.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/information_schema.sgml
@@ -2621,8 +2621,9 @@ ORDER BY
cs/devel/static/infoschema-table-privileges.html
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com
From 1c456ad6ee6377743b764bd16c87c435d6f2d63f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: ashu
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2018 14:45:51 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] Allow table_privileges view in informatio
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 9:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ashutosh Sharma writes:
>> Currently, table_privileges view in information_schema.sql doesn't
>> show privileges on materialized views for currently enabled roles. As
>> per the documentation-[1], it should be
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 9:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ashutosh Sharma writes:
>> Currently, table_privileges view in information_schema.sql doesn't
>> show privileges on materialized views for currently enabled roles. As
>> per the documentation-[1], it should be
Hi Robert,
On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 10:54 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 8:45 AM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > Imagine a superuser creates role u1. Since the superuser is creating
> > u1, it won't have membership in any role. Now, suppose u1 creates a
&g
Hi All,
On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 9:34 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 8:23 PM Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2025-01-23 Th 4:06 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 3:51 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > >> I wo
e the authority to
administer userC (the orphaned user in this case), which may not be
feasible for cloud environments where superuser access is restricted.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
Hi All,
On Thu, Jan 9, 2025 at 11:01 AM Ashutosh Sharma
wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> Starting from PG16, it seems that orphaned users can only be managed
> by superusers. For example, if userA creates userB, and userB creates
> userC, then both userB (the parent of userC) and userA
Hi Robert,
On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 10:22 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2025 at 12:31 AM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > Starting from PG16, it seems that orphaned users can only be managed
> > by superusers. For example, if userA creates userB, and userB creates
> >
dminister any other role should be different than
> > dropping one that does.
> >
>
> That seems reasonable and consistent with what we do elsewhere, as
> Andres noted.
>
Thank you all for your valuable inputs and suggestions. Based on the
consensus, we will move forward with this solution. I'll start working
on the coding part and share the patch for review by next week.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
Many Congratulations, Jacob.
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 11:00 AM Kashif Zeeshan wrote:
>
> Congrats Jacob.
>
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 8:32 AM Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
>>
>> Hearty congratulations Jacob.
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 6:55 AM Richard Guo wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sat, Apr 12, 2025 at 5:2
ld be
grateful if you could point me to the relevant discussion thread so I
can follow the progress and contribute if needed.
Thank you for your time and assistance.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
Hi Robert,
On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 9:48 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> Hi Robert,
>
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 10:54 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 8:45 AM Ashutosh Sharma
> > wrote:
> > > Imagine a superuser creates role u1. Since
Added a commitfest entry for this here:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/5608/
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 2:54 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> Hi Robert,
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 9:48 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > Hi Rober
t; drop completes?
>
I believe it is; I may need to adjust the location from where I'm
calling check_drop_role_dependency() to take care of this. I'll
address this in the next patch version. Thanks for bringing up this
concern.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
troduce any race conditions? For example, is it possible for
> > the new check to pass and then for a dependency to be added before the
> > drop completes?
>
> This is a serious concern for me as well.
>
This too will be taken care of in the next patch.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
role drop is completed,
addressing comments from Nathan and Robert.
3) Improved the error message to display the role dependencies in
detail, addressing feedback from Robert.
Please have a look and let me know for any further comments. Thanks.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
v2-0001-Add
201 - 300 of 306 matches
Mail list logo
