* Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote: > > 3. It messes around with pg_signal_backend(). There are currently no > > cases in which pg_signal_backend() throws an error, which is good, > > because it lets you write queries against pg_stat_activity() that > > don't fail halfway through, even if you are missing permissions on > > some things. This patch introduces such a case, which is bad. > > Good point, I'll move that check up into the other functions, which will > allow for a more descriptive error as well.
Err, I'm missing something here, as pg_signal_backend() is a misc.c
static internal function? How would you be calling it from a query
against pg_stat_activity()?
I'm fine making the change anyway, just curious..
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
