Hi Tom, On 3/13/17 1:13 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > ... oh, and now that I've actually looked at the patch, I think it's > a seriously bad idea to proceed by removing the mode parameter to > PathNameOpenFile et al. That's basically doubling down on an assumption > that there are NO places in the backend, and never will be any, in which > we want to create files with nondefault permissions. That assumption > seems broken on its face. It also makes the patch exceedingly invasive > for extensions.
I think it's a bad idea to have the same parameters copied over and over throughout the code with slight variations (e.g. 0600 vs S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR) but the same intent. In all cases there is another version of the function (added by this patch) that accepts a mode parameter. In practice this was only needed in one place, be_lo_export(). I think this makes a pretty good argument for standardization/simplification in other areas. Thanks, -- -David da...@pgmasters.net -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
