Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> writes: > On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 01:17:17PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Since we have only a few hours before 9.2.1 is due to wrap, my >> inclination for a band-aid fix is to put back that code. There might be >> some more elegant answer, but we haven't got time to find it now.
> Sounds fine for now. I suspect the better change would be to make > AcceptInvalidationMessages() unconditional in LockRelationOid() and friends. > There's no reason to desire recent ACLs only when opening by name. I think it's enough for now because the first access to a relation in a statement is always a name-based lookup from the parser. Were that not sufficient, we'd have had complaints before. The core problem really is that GRANT/REVOKE don't take any object-level lock on what they're changing. A "real" fix might require sprinkling AcceptInvalidationMessages calls into aclchk.c, but I'm unsure of the performance costs of that. Anyway, today is not the time to design something better. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers