Re: Extend ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES for large objects
От | Fujii Masao |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Extend ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES for large objects |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4e7a71b5-1c7e-48bf-909a-aee5a413fa97@oss.nttdata.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Extend ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES for large objects (Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: Extend ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES for large objects
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2025/07/10 14:11, Yugo Nagata wrote: > On Thu, 10 Jul 2025 13:23:47 +0900 > Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On 2025/07/10 10:30, Yugo Nagata wrote: >>> You're right. I must have overlooked something. I think I saw "TO" being >>> suggested after "FOREIGN SERVER" when no foreign servers were defined. >>> >>> The attached patch still prevents "TO/FROM" from being suggested after >>> "FOREIGN SERVER" in such cases. > >> >> Based on your patch, I'm thinking of simplifying the code like this: >> >> - else if (Matches("GRANT", MatchAnyN, "ON", MatchAny, MatchAny)) >> - COMPLETE_WITH("TO"); >> - else if (Matches("REVOKE", MatchAnyN, "ON", MatchAny, MatchAny)) >> - COMPLETE_WITH("FROM"); >> + else if (Matches("GRANT|REVOKE", MatchAnyN, "ON", MatchAny, MatchAny) && >> + !TailMatches("FOREIGN", "SERVER") && !TailMatches("LARGE", "OBJECT")) >> + { >> + if (Matches("GRANT", MatchAnyN, "ON", MatchAny, MatchAny)) >> + COMPLETE_WITH("TO"); >> + else >> + COMPLETE_WITH("FROM"); >> + } > > Thank you for your review! > I agree with your suggestion and have updated the patch accordingly. I've pushed the patch. Thanks! >>> But perhaps this corner case doesn't really >>> need to be handled? >> >> Probably I failed to get your point here. Could you clarify what you meant? > > I'm sorry for not explaining it clearly. > > Currently, TO or FROM could be suggested immediately after FOREIGN SERVER, but > only when no foreign servers are defined. When foreign servers do exist, > their names are correctly suggested instead, as expected. > > The patch fixed the behavior so that TO or FROM are not suggested after FOREIGN SERVER, > even when no foreign servers are defined. However, I've started to wonder if it's worth > fixing such a corner case. What do you think? I think it's worth doing. This issue can lead to unexpected behavior and is something users might run into. If the fix were overly complex for a minor issue, it might not be justified. But that's not the case here. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NTT DATA Japan Corporation
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: