On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> Sounds fine for now. I suspect the better change would be to make
> AcceptInvalidationMessages() unconditional in LockRelationOid() and friends.
> There's no reason to desire recent ACLs only when opening by name.
I agree, on both counts. I t
Noah Misch writes:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 01:17:17PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Since we have only a few hours before 9.2.1 is due to wrap, my
>> inclination for a band-aid fix is to put back that code. There might be
>> some more elegant answer, but we haven't got time to find it now.
> Sound
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 01:17:17PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I looked into bug #7557, which demonstrates a case where a session fails
> to notice a just-committed change in table permissions.
> - /*
> -* Check for shared-cache-inval messages before trying to open the
> -* relation. This
I looked into bug #7557, which demonstrates a case where a session fails
to notice a just-committed change in table permissions. This is pretty
obviously due to a failure to read the sinval message notifying other
backends of the pg_class.relacl update. Some digging in the git history
says it got
