From: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES FOR ROLE is broken |
Date: | 2013-06-07 23:32:40 |
Message-ID: | 20130607233240.GD408429@tornado.leadboat.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 02:49:37PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> writes:
> > On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 12:26:59PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Essentially the argument for allowing this without a permissions check
> >> is "I'm not really doing anything to the schema, just preconfiguring the
> >> rights that will be attached to a new object if I later (successfully)
> >> create one in this schema".
>
> > Seems fine. I might have instead changed it to a test of the caller's
> > permissions.
>
> I thought a bit about that, but it seems rather unrelated to the
> eventual use of the privileges.
Fair enough.
> > Roles and their memberships will be dumped in the globals portion of
> > pg_dumpall, whereas ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES will be dumped for individual
> > databases. How might a restore-order hazard arise?
>
> The issue is that the A.D.P. must come out after a grant of CREATE
> privileges on the schema.
Oh, true. The facts I called out there were inapplicable.
--
Noah Misch
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2013-06-07 23:46:09 | Re: About large objects asynchronous and non-blocking support |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2013-06-07 23:10:24 | Re: Bad error message on valuntil |