>> BTW, what is the official reviewer's opinion? >> It seems to me most of the issues on column-level privileges are >> resolved, so it is almost ready for getting merged. > > I tend to doubt Tom's had a chance to review it again yet, which is > fine, though I'm certainly hopeful the recent focus and our combined > efforts mean this patch can be included for 8.4. My personal opinion is > that it's ready for beta testing (which is kind of what this feels like > we're doing here) and barring any serious issues found during testing is > good to go for inclusion. > > As for areas where there could still be some improvment, I'd love to > hear your thoughts and opinions (and others!) on how column-level > privileges are handled in ExecuteGrantStmt and into ExecGrant_Relation > and how we might improve it. I don't like the nested for() loops in > ExecuteGrantStmt, but I don't see any easy way to resolve that and keep > the SQL-required syntax.
What is your concern? In my personal opinion, it is quite natural to apply nested-loop to handle multiple columns within multiple tables. At least, I don't have a smart idea to handle two-dimensional data structure withou nested-loop. > As for ExecGrant_Relation, it'd be nice if we > could shorten it somehow by either combining the relation and column > level handling into a single piece of code, or maybe refactoring it into > seperate functions which could be called from both pieces.. It seems to me ExecGrant_Relation() is a bit larger than other ExecGrant_XXXX()s. My preference is to clip out column-privilege part into ExecGrant_Attribute() and invoke it for each given columns. But, it is just my preference. Please ask it official commiters/reviewers. Thanks, -- OSS Platform Development Division, NEC KaiGai Kohei <kai...@ak.jp.nec.com> -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
