On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 12:53 PM Mark Dilger <mark.dil...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 16, 2021, at 7:43 AM, Joshua Brindle > > <joshua.brin...@crunchydata.com> wrote: > > > > Ah, I understand now. Would it be possible to pass the > > SettingAclRelationId if it exists or InvalidOid if not? > > SettingAclRelationId is always defined, so we can always pass that value. > But the settingId itself may sometimes be InvalidOid.
Yes, that is what I meant. > > That way if a > > MAC implementation cares about a particular GUC it'll ensure it's in > > pg_setting_acl. > > A much cleaner solution would be to create new ObjectAccessTypes with a > corresponding new Invoke macro and Run function. Those could take setting > names, not Oids, and include additional information about whether the > operation is SET, RESET or ALTER SYSTEM, what the new value is (if any), what > kind of setting it is (bool, int, ...), etc. I don't think such a patch > would even be all that hard to write. > > What do you think? Personally, I would be happy with that, but since it's a whole new hooking method I suspect it'll be an uphill battle. That definitely seems like another patchset though, if you do submit this I will test and review. Thank you.
