From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Phil Frost <indigo(at)bitglue(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: lastval exposes information that currval does not |
Date: | 2006-07-27 17:17:28 |
Message-ID: | 20060727171728.GB18774@surnet.cl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Phil Frost wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 06:36:30PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > I'm sure some people agree that there is a problem. It would help,
> > however, if you were not talking about two different things at once.
> > And it would help if you actually proposed a change that would improve
> > matters.
>
> What two things are there? I think I've already proposed a solution: do
> the schema usage check at the same time as all the other permission
> checks. Alternately, document the behavior accurately. I've proposed
> text here too, but the revisions keep missing the point. What needs
> clarification?
What we should really do is have lastval() fail if the user does not
have appropiate permissions on the schema. Having it not fail is a bug,
and documenting a bug turns it not into a feature, but into a "gotcha".
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bort, Paul | 2006-07-27 17:17:50 | Re: GUC with units, details |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-07-27 17:16:46 | Re: lastval exposes information that currval does not |