From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: permission inconsistency with functions |
Date: | 2010-07-23 19:04:59 |
Message-ID: | 1279911899.9866.23.camel@jd-desktop.unknown.charter.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 21:55 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On fre, 2010-07-23 at 11:48 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > "In particular, it must have read access to all tables that you want
> > to
> > back up, so in practice you almost always have to run it as a database
> > superuser."
> >
> > Ignoring the fact that databases have a lot more objects than tables,
> > there is no READ/SELECT permission for functions. Thus in order to
> > backup a function, I must have EXECUTE permissions on the function.
> > Further if I don't have EXECUTE permissions I can still see the
> > function in pg_proc.
>
> In order to back up a table's contents you must read it, but you don't
> need to execute a function in order to back it up. It's not
> inconsistent, it's just different.
Sorry you are correct, I made a mistake in my ERROR message reading.
JD
--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marko Tiikkaja | 2010-07-23 19:06:09 | Re: Rewrite, normal execution vs. EXPLAIN ANALYZE |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-07-23 19:00:47 | Re: Rewrite, normal execution vs. EXPLAIN ANALYZE |