On Thu, 5 Nov 2026 at 07:56, Yugo Nagata <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Nov 2026 07:16:45 +0900 > Michael Paquier <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 04, 2026 at 03:55:31PM -0600, Zsolt Parragi wrote: > > > I have only one small comment/question: it seems like the > > > PGSTAT_FILE_FORMAT_ID change was dropped between v14 and v15? > > > > That would be the kind of thing a committer would take care of once/if > > committing such a patch. I'd suggest to add a notice to the commit > > message of the sent patch instead, to not forget that the counter > > needs a bump when/if it gets merged. > > Thank you for the suggestion. > > Attached is an updated patch with only the suggested comment added.
Thanks for the updated patch. I reviewed v20 and found that a skip is recorded before any privilege checks are performed. While a lock is held on a table, any role that can see the table's schema can run: VACUUM (SKIP_LOCKED) t; ANALYZE (SKIP_LOCKED) t; This allows the role to increment t's lock_skipped_vacuum_count / lock_skipped_analyze_count and update the corresponding last_lock_skipped_* timestamps, even if it has no privileges on the table. Since it allows an unprivileged role to modify the shared statistics of a table it cannot access. Attached a patch which has the test to reproduce this issue. Thoughts? Regards, Vignesh
0001-Add-isolation-test-for-lock-skip-statistics-and-priv.patch
Description: Binary data
