| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Review of GetUserId() Usage |
| Date: | 2014-10-16 18:44:36 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoafuwnYeF1jy6TK7EovncyWyqGfYJ+4CSSCmHhXwD6XbA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> On Thursday, October 16, 2014, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
>> > As a side-note, this change is included in the 'role attributes' patch.
>>
>> It's really important that we keep separate changes in separate
>> patches that are committed in separate commits. Otherwise, it gets
>> really confusing.
>
> I can do that, but it overlaps with the MONITORING role attribute changes
> also..
I'm not sure what your point is. Whether keeping changes separate is
easy or hard, and whether things overlap with multiple other things or
just one, we need to make the effort to do it.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-10-16 18:49:37 | Re: CREATE POLICY and RETURNING |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-10-16 18:43:36 | Re: Additional role attributes && superuser review |