On 2016/09/07 12:29, Corey Huinker wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:46 PM, Amit Langote wrote:
>> OK.
> Well...maybe not, depending on what Craig and other can do to educate me
> about the TAP tests.
Sure.
>>> Changing table-level options requires superuser privileges, for security
>>> reasons: only a superuser should be able to determine which file is read,
>>> or which program is run. In principle non-superusers could be allowed to
>>> change the other options, but that's not supported at present.
>>
>> Hmm, just a little modification would make it better for me:
>>
>> ... for security reasons. For example, only superuser should be able to
>> determine which file read or which program is run.
>>
>> Although that could be just me.
>
> In this case "determine" is unclear whether a non-superuser can set the
> program to be run, or is capable of knowing which program is set to be run
> by the fdw.
Hmm, it is indeed unclear.
How about:
... for security reasons. For example, only superuser should be able to
*change* which file is read or which program is run.
I just realized this is not just about a C comment. There is a line in
documentation as well which needs an update. Any conclusion here should
be applied there.
> We may want some more opinions on what is the most clear.
Certainly.
>> But as you said above, this could be deferred to the committer.
>>
>
> Yeah, and that made for zero storage savings: a char pointer which is never
> assigned a string takes up as much space as a 4-byte-aligned boolean. And
> the result is that "file" really means program, which I found slightly
> awkward.
My only intent to push for that approach is to have consistency with other
code implementing a similar feature although it may not be that important.
Thanks,
Amit