> On 17 Jun 2024, at 16:56, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> writes:
>> I wonder if this will break any tools/scripts in prod which relies on the >> previous (faulty) behaviour. It will be interesting to see if anything shows >> up on -bugs. Off the cuff it seems like a good idea judging by where we are >> and what we can fix with it. > > Considering that SHARED_DEPENDENCY_INITACL has existed for less than > two months, it's hard to believe that any outside code has grown any > dependencies on it, much less that it couldn't be adjusted readily. Doh, I was thinking about it backwards, clearly not a worry =) >> I wonder if it's worth reverting passing the owner ID for v17 and revisiting >> that in 18 if we work on recording the ID. Shaving a few catalog lookups is >> generally worthwhile, doing them without needing the result for the next five >> years might bite us. > > Yeah, that was the direction I was leaning in, too. I'll commit the > revert of that separately, so that un-reverting it shouldn't be too > painful if we eventually decide to do so. Sounds good. -- Daniel Gustafsson