From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Philip Crotwell <crotwell(at)seis(dot)sc(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Re: [JDBC] unlink large objects |
Date: | 2001-06-09 20:32:46 |
Message-ID: | 200106092032.f59KWkt28228@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc |
> Philip Crotwell <crotwell(at)seis(dot)sc(dot)edu> writes:
> > I was vacuuming, but as the owner of the database. When I do that there
> > are messages that should have clued me in, lke
> > NOTICE: Skipping "pg_largeobject" --- only table owner can VACUUM it
>
> > From now on I will vacuum as user postgres, but I wonder if there is a
> > need for individual users to be able to vacuum large obects by themselves.
>
> Good point. More generally, it seems like it might be a good idea to
> allow the owner of an individual database to vacuum all the system
> catalogs in it, even if he's not the superuser. Comments anyone?
Seems db owner should be able to do whatever they want to the non-global
system tables.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-06-09 22:15:54 | Re: Fw: Isn't pg_statistic a security hole - Solution Proposal |
Previous Message | Vince Vielhaber | 2001-06-09 18:42:36 | Re: grant and SQL92 |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Cramer | 2001-06-11 14:51:46 | Re: Failed Connection (again) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-06-09 16:59:58 | Re: [JDBC] unlink large objects |